tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840827341677198212024-03-19T05:46:05.149+01:00Faces of ChinaComments and reflections on China todayAndré Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-20524450838248777822010-01-13T13:56:00.005+01:002010-01-24T20:23:07.175+01:00Involuntary transit<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkExJCRbVsICLXforDIdhkaMPMQNcE8WReuDeTtcV3aeCObULBjPi96JuAEgdrJyfKI2tY8P1WRRjl11Mw8abXCxTJ3E4KgN5_DYjCEn8B58zkVeFwoZz7ZYqpDEENYkPvF0EVPKGHG3E/s1600-h/fengzhenghu.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 256px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkExJCRbVsICLXforDIdhkaMPMQNcE8WReuDeTtcV3aeCObULBjPi96JuAEgdrJyfKI2tY8P1WRRjl11Mw8abXCxTJ3E4KgN5_DYjCEn8B58zkVeFwoZz7ZYqpDEENYkPvF0EVPKGHG3E/s320/fengzhenghu.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5426210144890158450" /></a><br /><br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">From <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feng_Zhenghu">Wikipedia</a>:</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Feng Zhenghu 冯正虎 is a Chinese economist and scholar based in Shanghai. Citing Amnesty International, The Guardian said that Feng was "a prominent human rights defender" in China. In 2001 he was sent to prison for three years ostensibly for "illegal business activity". He was released in 2004, has since written critical pieces highlighting alleged malpractice by local governments and forced evictions.<br /><br />Outside China, Feng is best known for having been refused re-entry into China eight times in 2009. His protest, of refusing to leave the immigration hall of Narita International Airport, Japan, since November 4, attracted concern from Asian activists, and received world-wide media attention.<br /><br />In early 2009, Feng was inexplicably detained for 41 days; he left China for medical treatment in Japan soon afterwards — in April 2009. On attempting to return home in June, he was refused entry by the authorities. According to Feng's sister, airlines prevented him from boarding a China-bound flight four times; on the four occasions he succeeded in boarding a plane, Chinese authorities at Shanghai turned him away. A Japanese immigration official said Feng arrived from Shanghai on 4 November with a valid Chinese passport and a visa to enter Japan – but has refused to be admitted. He is spending his time on a couch near an immigration checkpoint in the south wing of Terminal 1 of Narita Airport, subsisting on snacks given to him by travelers and activists (including Hong Kong activist Christina Chan).<br /><br />He has been likened to the Tom Hanks character in Steven Spielberg's 2004 film The Terminal. According to news reports, the airport authorities are embarrassed by Feng's presence, and would prefer that Feng enter Japan. Since Dec. 3rd, 2009, the airport authorities are issuing daily notices to Mr. Feng, requesting him to leave the arrival zone and be admitted into Japan.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Links to more background material:</span><br /><br />Mr. Feng’s twitter feed: <a href="http://twitter.com/fzhenghu">http://twitter.com/fzhenghu</a><br /><br />Mr. Feng’s homepage: <a href="http://docs.google.com/View?id=d8xbpp6_4hhpb2dfd">http://docs.google.com/View?id=d8xbpp6_4hhpb2dfd</a><br /><br />Mr. Feng’s flickr page <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/fzhenghu/ ">http://www.flickr.com/photos/fzhenghu/<br /></a><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">The following are translations of the correspondence between Mr. Feng and a netizen. <br /><br />Translated by Thomas de Groot and André Holthe. <br /><br />Enjoy.<br /></span><br /><br /><br />From: <a href="wwqwq@hotmail.com ">wwqwq@hotmail.com </a><br /><br />To: <a href="fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp">fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp</a> <br /><br />Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2010 09:39:24 -0800<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject: Speechless<br /></span><br />Don’t you ever again bring shame to the Chinese people! ! !<br /><br /><br /><br />From: <a href="fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp ">fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp </a><br /><br />To: <a href="wwqwq@hotmail.com ">wwqwq@hotmail.com </a><br /><br />Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:13:05 +0900<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject: RE: Speechless </span><br /><br />Thanks for the info.<br /><br />FZH <br /><br /><br /><br />From: <a href="wwqwq@hotmail.com">wwqwq@hotmail.com</a><br /><br />To: <a href="fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp">fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp</a><br /><br />Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 11:10:40 -0800 <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject: RE: Speechless</span> <br /><br />First of all, to be a Chinese citizen you should create a good image for China, this is the minimum requirement for being Chinese.<br /><br />What you provide does not explain anything. If you continue like this your just going to make more Chinese feel disgusted. If I was you, I would first return to Japan, then let family and friends in China help you engage in a lawsuit. If you let more overseas media propagate on this it is going to be even harder for you to return home. Because as China becomes increasingly powerful, foreign countries are less and less going to interfere with China’s domestic politics.<br /><br />Happy New Year!<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Feng Zhenghu is not expecting foreign governments to protect the right of Chinese citizens to return home <br /></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Response to letter from speechless netizen</span><br /> <br />Speechless netizen:<br /> <br />Thank you for your letter.<br /> <br />You should advise the relevant authorities in Shanghai not to illegally forbid its citizens to return home and set a create a good image for China. <br /><br />I do not wish to sleep in the open outside at the entrance of Japan, it's the Shanghai police who kidnapped me with force and put me here. Furthermore, I am not Japanese, I am Chinese, I've already been denied entrance to China 8 times now. As soon as they open the door, I will return home; well, who wants to sleep in the open at an airport in Japan? It's that simple, and you should get that.<br /><br />If China really is that powerful, then why should we flee from calamity and go to Japan. If one should follow your advise and first return to Japan to drag out this shameful existence, you can't say that Chinese people will feel disgusted, it's going to be the Japanese who will despise the good-for-nothing Chinese; when our rights are violated, we don't dear to stand up and resist. <br /><br />Perhaps you don't know, I've already entrusted our country's most famous lawyer, Mo Shaoping, to lodge a complaint against the Pudong police and customs in Shanghai, the court has already accepted the case, but the hearing will not be until February, and the case is set to last 7 days. It seems that you don't understand Chinese administration of justice, you're really naive. I know that I have to wait to return home before I can start a real lawsuit. <br /><br />If China really is that powerful, it should be self-confident enough to welcome supervision by public opinion and not care about whether it's domestic or foreign media, as long as it's reporting that seek the truth from facts. The Chinese government should change what's wrong and make greater exertions. In my case, all the major foreign news outlets are reporting, but not a single domestic one. This is not normal, so it appears as if the overseas media are too many. If domestic media took initiative and took on the responsibility of supervision by public opinion, and dared to supervise the government, then society would have been normal; government officials wouldn't make absurd decisions and humiliate China.<br /><br />I have more faith in the Chinese government then you have, they look down on anticommunism, underground anti-Chinese media, and in particular a few Chinese tabloids, but they can't ignore the world's major news outlets, not even the all powerful American government dare to ignore them, because the world's major news outlets represent the will of the people. Even though domestic news outlets are silent, they will in the end have to do something. And, you can't seal off the internet, and the masses are spreading my story. I am convinced that the leaders of the Chinese government will sober up.<br /><br />Furthermore, I want to tell you that the facts that I've been able to live here for 62 days is not thanks to the Chinese or the Japanese government, but thanks to the support of Chinese citizens. People from Beijing, Shanghai and other places as well as overseas Chinese from Hong Kong, Taiwan and America who have brought me food and funds. I've received several thousand letters of support, a majority of them from Chinese people. Every day tens of thousands of travelers pass by me, most of them Chinese people, and they see my unfavorable situation. None of them feel disgusted, they all sympathize with me and support me. Of course, everybody who hear me story are shocked and feel humiliated. This powerful China shouldn't cause scandals where its citizen are not allowed to return home. They feel disgusted and detest these government officials. In many Chinese people's eyes, I am a person who truly loves his country. I know that this is a fact.<br /><br />I don't know what kind of Chinese people you are talking about. I think it's only the government officials who made this mistake that are disgusted and anxious about being held responsible. All government officials who doesn't have a stake in this will urge the Chinese government to let me return home and end this national humiliation. If you wish to help out, you should let your friends read the article "Feng Zhenghu from Shanghai have been sleeping at the Tokyo airport for 62 days - Not letting Feng Zhenghu return home is a Chinese national humiliation" and see if they feel disgusted? You can also tell your mother about this story and she will definitely say: "There's not reason not to let a child to come home. If the child's been naughty, just give it a beating and that's all".<br /><br />Some Chinese people are arrogant and think that China is powerful now. Chinese party officials think they can do as they please; not even America can criticize us now. As a matter of fact, this the inferiority complex of villains. Fortunately, the mind of China's leaders is wide-awake: China is not really a powerful country in the world, it's just that our population is bigger, our market demands a bit higher, and that's all. Western politicians are flattering you, cheating you, giving you face; what they want is your lining, the money in your pocket. In fact, the never cared about your domestic affairs in the first place, they don't need the votes of the Chinese people. So, it's not that China is powerful and that people less and less interfere with China's internal affairs. It's just that a few Chinese people think they are so clever.<br /> <br />I really don't expect foreign government to protect my right to return home, I expect the Chinese people to let me return home. A Chinese fleeing China to seek political asylum in a foreign country would require the help of a foreign government, this is just fair and reasonable. A Chinese returning home who needs the help of a foreign government is just ridiculous. There's not a single Western country who would help foreign nationals to return home. Interfering with the other country's internal affairs in a case like this, at most they would declare where they stand and that's it. Actually this foreign national just have to work on his own in order to ultimately return home. If the Japanese government finally can't take it anymore and protest against the Chinese government, demanding that the Chinese government take responsibility and let me return home, they are concerned about my human rights, but about the sovereignty of their own country; it's China who interferes with their internal affairs, by kidnapping me with force and putting me here, throw me away and giving a damn, handing me over to the Japanese people.<br /><br />You say that what I provide does not explain anything. I don't know, I can't explain why I don't have the right to return home or why I don't have the power to return home? Communicating over the internet I do not know your cultural level, but from your style of writing I can see that you in the end will understand the reasons behind all this. Maybe you already know it. Attached is "Feng Zhenghu from Shanghai have been sleeping at the Tokyo airport for 62 days - Not letting Feng Zhenghu return home is a Chinese national humiliation", "Feng Zhenghu's letter to Hu Jintao, the president of China (01.09.2009)" and "Defend Chinese citizens right to return home - a legal proposal". You can give it to your friends, maybe they see things more clear than you.<br /><br />This legal proposal is based on Chinese law, I don't know if you are familiar with Chinese law? The spokesman of China's Foreign Ministry told reporters that China's relevant authorities are handling my case according to Chinese law. According to Chinese law, China's relevant authorities are violating the law by prohibiting its citizens to return home. <br /><br />In order to let more Chinese people know about my thoughts, I will publish this letter.<br /><br />I wish you a safe and sound New Year, freedom and happiness <br /><br />Feng Zhenghu<br /> <br /><br />04.01.2010, outside the entrance of Japan<br /><br /><br /><br />From: <a href="wwqwq@hotmail.com">wwqwq@hotmail.com</a><br /><br />To: <a href="fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp ">fzh2005@hotmail.co.jp </a><br /><br />Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 23:22:05<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Subject RE: Speechless</span><br /><br />Hi,<br /><br />First I want to clarify that I am not a Chinese citizen anymore, and have no right to gossip about China’s situation. Everything I have said comes from my heart. I believe: everybody can make mistakes, you can resolve this through the legal system; If you believe everybody else are mistaken, should you not examine yourself?<br /><br />Happy New Year and I hope you can return home soon!<br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Chinese love China more than anyone else</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Response to speechless netizen’s second letter</span><br /><br />Speechless netizen:<br /><br />Thank you for your reply. <br /><br />I am grateful for your sincerity. You told me: “You are not a Chinese citizen now. By law you are not Chinese, you are a foreigner.”. Few of today’s Chinese, especially Chinese in China have this kind of shameless mentality, they have gotten rights and revolt when their rights are violated.<br /><br />Actually, you do not need to be afraid of criticizing the shortcomings of the Chinese government, your gossip about China’s affairs doesn't matter, you're a foreigner, not a foreign country’s government, the Chinese government will not censure you when interfering with the internal affairs of China. You have already been gossiping about China in your previous letters in a Chinese tone of voice. We Chinese are used to be able to interact with different views, a fact that might cause you to get reacquainted with China.<br /><br />You say that everything you say come from your heart. I do believe that you are being sincere, but this makes me feel even more sad, you’re suffering from both one-sided love and phobia. The internet police, the 50 cent party, anonymous posters and people who benefit from all this also express these kind of views, but they know that they are working or cracking jokes, their words do not come from the heart. Without pay or other benefits, they would be cursing the Chinese government, they would not be as moderate and rational and with total lack of objection like you.<br /><br />You are indeed naive and easy to deceive. Do you really think that the legal system in China is the same as that of the US, Canada and Japan? That you can resolve everything through law? China is a country where the Party is the supreme power, and although most civil law suits can be resolve through law, if you take legal action that ends up interfering with the government or with the interests of party officials you will most certainly fail, even to file a case can be difficulty. Today China is the perfect textbook example of a strengthen legal system, and at the same time it is also a partial administration of justice. This reality might be hard for you to comprehend, most foreigners don't understand China's problems.<br /><br />You say “If you believe everybody else are mistaken, should you not examine yourself?” I do not believe that everybody else are mistaken, in my case it is only a few officials who have made mistakes. However, your mode of thinking is a typical example. Not to question the responsibility of the offender, but rather that of the victim, why do I not attack others, but you then? You also have faults, right? As a matter fact, asking these kind of questions while pretending to be just and fair is just pure gangster logic, it is the same to dread the thug and not dare to to battle for a just cause, just to console oneself. When our government officials preposterously infringe of our rights without it being in accordance with the law, they all use this logic and deceive the public.<br /><br />It is said that China's embassy officials use the same logic when not extending its citizens' passports, rather than acting in accordance with the law, they rhetorically ask the applicants: "You know why your passport was not extended". These are not the acts of a government administration, but rather that of the criminal underworld. The behavior of the government administration is not authorized by law, meaning illegal, it has no basis in the law, one cannot just simply act as one pleases or act passive, as legally defined. In China, there is no legal basis for refusing extending citizens' passports, embassy officials do not have the rights to refuse Chinese citizens who apply to extend their passport.<br /><br />In our country, a small group of plainclothes policemen and a great deal of our security personnel defy laws, human and divine, they do as they please, if they want to kidnap they kidnap, if they want to take you into custody they take you into custody, if they want to block your house door they block it, they do not require to show any legal credentials, they do not require any basis in the law, that the basis of this logic. They openly raise a hue and cry: "We do not understand the law, it is our boss who sent us.". " Victims demand them to provide proof when they restrict people's freedom and liberties, but they all assume a look of local bullies and loafers, even to the point of asking the victims: "Why do I care about you and not others?". If this reasoning of violating people's rights is established, well then we do not need laws, there will be no justice and safety, procuratorial organs and people's courts will exist in name only. The murderer too can say:". Why did I kill you and not others?" The burglar too can say: "Why did I mug you, and not others?". The petty thief too can say: " Why did I rob you and not others?". According to this gangster logic killing, plundering and stealing are all legitimate actions, and the victims deserved it.<br /><br />Since you have already become a foreign citizen, I think you certainly live in a Western country, and you have been living there for quite some time. You might not be directly affected by the Chinese reality, and rely just on the news in the paper as well as your simple feelings towards the motherland, in the past our countries pickled vegetables were disgusting, so eating pickled vegetables now might make you homesick. I understand that you say all this with sincerity and good intentions. Yet, I wish that you would go native and be a good foreign citizen and be completely Westernized, accept the ideas freedom, democracy, rule by law human rights, these are the main aspects of the Western value system. It is also advanced human concepts and you should not worry about being labeled a liberal because you have already become Canadian, Japanese or some other foreigner, loving your own country, and being loyal to one's country is natural.<br /><br />The way we Chinese see it, to see those overseas Chinese who have become foreign nationals raise the five star red flag, wear the crown of patriotic overseas Chinese and sing patriotic songs is truly nondescript, it is indeed very strange. Overseas Chinese citizens who are patriotic, even though they are criticizing the Chinese government, they too want their country to become even better, because it is their country. We Chinese in China love China more than anyone else, because we live in China every day, this is our home. By making use of the mental shame and physical suffering that I have to endure by sleeping in the open outside at the entrance of Japan I want to raise the Chinese government’s respect for Chinese human rights, letting the Chinese masses know about this national humiliation, give those who have a sense of shame courage, and get all of us together to once and for all get rid of the evil of not letting Chinese citizens return to their country and home.<br /><br />Speechless netizen, I have been harsh on you. You have made a couple remarks, I have responded with an essay, and lots of netizens are also discussing this. My response is not directed against you as a person, but against a certain view, or a kind of traditional influence one might say. Yet I hope I didn’t hurt your feelings, and I once again thank you for your kindness.<br /><br />I wish you a safe and sound New Year, freedom and happiness.<br /><br />Feng Zhenghu<br /><br />05.01.2010, outside the entrance of Japan.<br /><br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-45855287089326585982009-12-29T11:21:00.003+01:002009-12-29T12:22:57.809+01:00China's Online Crime Gangs: the debateAfter CCTC's revelation that the Chinese Internet is infested with "Online Hitmen" and "Crime Gangs" trying to manipulate public opinion through blogs and BBS (See <a href="http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20091221_1.htm">ESWN</a>), a heated debate has started on the definition of "Online Organized Crime" and the reasons behind this sudden government witch hunt. This week, the <a href="http://www.shbiz.com.cn/cms.php?prog=show&search=2&query=3213&order=3&nums=15&serviceid=7&page=1">Market Section</a> of the <a href="http://www.shbiz.com.cn/cms.php?prog=show&pp=p1">Shanghai Business Daily</a> was completely consumed by the matter. Columnist <a href="http://blog.sina.com.cn/chenyongdong">Chen Yongdong</a>, associate professor in New Media at Shanghai Drama College, explains why it is useless to call companies who specialize in Viral campaigns "Crime Gangs". He mentions some famous Chinese Internet Memes and Virals, and ends with a suggestion for China's Central Television. <br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><a href="http://www.shbiz.com.cn/cms.php?prog=show&tid=131347&csort=1">“Online Crime Gangs” are exaggerated</a><br /><br />By Chen Yongdong<br /><br />Recently, a CCTC program used words like “Online Underworld” (<em>wangluo heishehui</em> 网络黑社会), “Online Thugs” and other screaming words to describe the phenomenon of IT-companies using the Internet to defame and attack (<em>dihui daji</em> 诋毁打击) the competition. Even though it should be noted that the practices the television program described are in fact real, and have been common practice for some time now, I feel using terms like “Online Crime Gangs” are somewhat overtly critical. It almost reeks of ‘signal posting’ (<em>biaotidang</em> 标题党)(giving an alarming and unrelated title to a piece in order to attract more attention, haodalong).<br />First of all, online defamation is indeed very serious, but there is no need to make it into a grave danger. I should concede that there are in fact companies whose core business is to influence online opinion (<em>wangluo yulun</em> 网络舆论). Their web posting is endless, and their sphere of influence enormous (<em>saodang fanwei</em> 扫荡范围 lit. mopping reach, haodalong). Just look at last year’s “Master Kang’s mineral water sources” incident(see <a href="http://www.danwei.org/front_page_of_the_day/master_kongs_advertisement_con.php">Danwei</a>), or this year’s “Wanglaoji Herbal Tea additives” (see <a href="http://www.chinacsr.com/en/2009/05/14/5239-wanglaoji-uses-unapproved-herbal-medicines-in-beverage-products/">ChinaCSR</a>) incident. These ‘scandals’ show on what scale the defamation tactics can be used. Actually, Central Television wasn’t even the first to discover these practices. Defamation tactics have been around for quite a while, and known by many netizens. The concept is very simple, just look at the hype started by the “Jia Junpeng, your mom wants you to go home to eat!” post(see <a href="http://www.chinasmack.com/stories/jia-junpeng-your-mom-wants-you-to-go-home-to-eat/">ChinaSmack</a>). Nonetheless, even though many netizens feel this online defamation is a bad thing and creates confusion, there is no need to make it into a grave and monstrous danger. After all, netizens have a pretty good sense of judgement. It is just like when we encounter a street vendor, most people do not believe him, and we definitely don’t call street vendors “organized crime”.<br />Second of all, “Online Crime Gangs” is not an appropriate term, because it doesn’t cover the diversity of online misbehaviour. Maybe Central Television only used this term to attract attention, to make people notice the program. But this seems too hungry for attention. Anyhow, “Online Crime Gangs” seems to me like a very unclear concept. Among many types of online behaviour, we find posts online, meticulously crafted to be a guaranteed hype, but also posts that praise a certain product in a refined and subtle way, there are the famous ‘Human Flesh Searches” that violate privacy rights, there is slandering and swearing, and then there is also the defamation of business competition through web posts. Of all these different types, at least the first two can hardly be grouped together under the flag of ‘online crime’. Even the privacy violating ‘Human Flesh Searches’ are instigated by individual netizens. So we can conclude that only the last two categories effectively qualify for the term. And these forms of slander, name-calling and defamation are already illegal in the ‘offline world’, they are no different online. Even these forms of lawbreaking do not really qualify to be called “Organized Crime”.<br />China doesn’t have Organized Crime. Interestingly, back in August we were debating whether or not China had a criminal underworld. Back then it was said that, under Chinese law and in legal terms, we didn’t really have organized crime gangs, just “Mafia-style organizations”. If you look at it this way, how is it possible that China suddenly has “online crime gangs”? With regard to “organizations with a mafia-nature”, our penal code does not really have what it takes to tackle this online defamatory behaviour either. Domestic legal experts say “mafia style organizations” are recognized by having a clear degree of violence, in pursuit of financial gain, and handle in corrupt ways. Its members must be numerous, its internal organizational structure must be intimate and intricate. Their actions must always focus around some illegal way of making money, vainly maintaining a sphere of influence and to have domination as a goal. So clearly, online defamation does not qualify for it is not violent, corrupt or pursuing domination in any form. <br />Concluding, even as online defamatory behaviour is rampant, and as a business model of competition it is quite suspect, it does not rise up to the definition of “organized crime gangs”. So I would suggest Central Television to withdraw the term, to replace it with the much more appropriate and accurate term “Online Grey (<em>huise</em> 灰色)Industry”. <br /><br />陈永东 Chen Yongdong 29-12-2009<br /><br />translated by Haodalong<br /></span>Thomas de Groothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08869588218160539862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-84971804193377843342009-12-17T11:11:00.002+01:002009-12-17T12:38:11.409+01:00Remarrying , the best scheme for retirement?From <a href="http://www.infzm.com/content/38787">Southern Weekly's review section page F 30, 17.12.2009</a>.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br />A few days ago when I returned home to my village to visit relatives, I heard that my widowed aunt was planning to remarry, her husband being a 70 year old worker from our village. People in the village talk about this with great envy; my 52 year old aunt is in good health and can work in the fields of our village for another 10 years without having to save money for retirement, now she relies on her husband's pension, and with health insurance she can live a life of ease --- It really is “the best scheme for retirement”. My aunt also told me, this kind of remarrying is already becoming more and more common, some marriage recommendation companies have even opened up shops in the village in order to promote this kind of “retirement scheme” service. <br /><br /><br />Supervisor of a private enterprise, <a href="http://maps.google.com/places/cn/zibo">Zibo</a>, Shandong province<br /><br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-23659740202101817882009-12-13T12:07:00.004+01:002009-12-13T12:23:48.790+01:00Crazy Garlic<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzGuH_Nl0Mabx0ekk0LcrUGpWhHqzd0oln_eutfInSfwyBMLxzq7odFbViu9pt4D6-DbeZIyP6thx9gxlW_oJOWrVhx95AoPXWf_2bm7abn1fIoQJz0e5Bs9onBdjGl1zu1PqcR27PWMk/s1600-h/crazy+garlic.jpeg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 207px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzGuH_Nl0Mabx0ekk0LcrUGpWhHqzd0oln_eutfInSfwyBMLxzq7odFbViu9pt4D6-DbeZIyP6thx9gxlW_oJOWrVhx95AoPXWf_2bm7abn1fIoQJz0e5Bs9onBdjGl1zu1PqcR27PWMk/s320/crazy+garlic.jpeg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5414678769624552450" /></a><br /><a href="http://www.infzm.com/content/38622?page=0">Southern Weekly's homepage of today</a> features a Xinhua article on this years garlic prices.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br />In 2009, garlic farmers and traders in <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=%E6%B2%B3%E5%8D%97%E7%9C%81%E4%B8%AD%E7%89%9F%E5%8E%BF&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:nb-NO:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Zhongmu,+%E9%83%91%E5%B7%9E%E5%B8%82,+%E6%B2%B3%E5%8D%97%E7%9C%81,+%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD&ei=w74kS5zaMI3c7APe7JHEBg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ8gEwAA">Zhongmu county</a>, Henan province, the home of garlic production in China, experienced radical changes in garlic prices. In just a half year garlic export prices surged from 100 Yuan per ton to several thousand Yuan per ton, and retail price also increased tenfold. <br /><br />According to news reports, garlic prices dropped steadily after this years Spring Festival, the value of some garlic traders inventory was at this point not even enough to cover the cost of refrigerating the storage. In May during harvest season, the price of fresh garlic was not more than 0.2-0.3 Yuan per half kilo, and a majority of garlic farmers didn’t make a profit when the prices suddenly increased, yet a lot of traders made fortunes. According to analysis, a sharp reduction in the number of planting areas, reduced production amounts, and speculation all lead to this crazy increase in garlic prices. To local garlic farmers, this years crazy garlic prices might be a mixed blessing, and they can just hope that next years crop will be bought at a stable and fair price. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Picture:</span> President of Zhongmu county storage association and general manager of Heng Da storage Liu Shaochen shows Zhongmu garlic that's ready for sale.<br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-28767923792974056662009-12-11T21:15:00.002+01:002009-12-11T21:27:24.085+01:00British people's view on ChinaFrom <a href="http://www.infzm.com/content/38511">Southern Weekly's review section 09.12.2009</a>, a part of their "Watching China" series.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Author:</span> Southern Weekly's editorial department <br /><br />The independent British research company <a href="www.populus.com/">Populus</a> recently conducted a survey which found that 41 % of British parliament members believe that over the next 50 years China will become Britain's largest trade partner. The data presented in this survey is undoubtedly good news for Chinese companies planning to enter the British market.<br /> <br />But it also includes news that are not that encouraging: 45 % of ordinary people believe that the quality of Chinese products is inferior to British products, which is three times the number of people with the opposite view (14 %). Is this really a fact? Certainly there are some Chinese products of bad quality, but there are also many Chinese products that are not only cheap, but also of superior quality. Even so Chinese companies should not ignore public opinion, no matter if this view surely differs from reality. <br /><br />The basic solution to this problem is of course to improve product quality, create one's own brands, and gradually change the West's prejudices against "Chinese manufacturing". The survey discovered that young British consumers understand more about the new generation of imported Chinese products and their view on "Chinese manufacturing" is also more positive: 60 % of people between the age of 55 and 64 and 56 % of people above the age 64 believe the quality of Chinese products are worse than British, while only 33 % of people between 18 and 24 and 32 % of people between 35 and 34 are of the same view.<br /><br />Young British people and “Chinese manufacturing” put together is an extremely good opportunity, but the opportunity is only there for those who are prepared, if only this time we do not once again ruin our reputation by going the way of Russia “using chicken feathers as eiderdown”.<br /><br /><br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-37316230618316972672009-12-05T15:43:00.005+01:002009-12-05T18:29:23.643+01:00Residence permitFrom Southern Weekly's review section page F 29, 03.12.2009.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Residence permit! Residence permit!</span><br /><br />Year in year out I've been a migrant worker, and after a while my wife joined me, while my parents were looking after our 6 year old daughter, making her a stay behind child. When our child entered kindergarten, I planned to settle down in this alien land and then for her to attend school here, but because we are not "locals", not having a "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system">residence permit</a>", not included the costs of transfer her to another school , but just the normal fees for one school term was more than 1000 Yuan. At the time me and my wife had just found work and we were short of money, so we had no choice but to temporarily drop our plan. Later when we got a small raise, we once again started considering bringing our daugther over to study. But when we went to the local primary school to seek advice I once again felt dejected, again because we do not have a "residence permit". If our daugther was to attend school here, she wouldn't be able to take the required entrance exams for middel school and university because the local school won't let people without "residence permit" take the test. Finally, I abandoned the plan of bringing our daughter over for study, and my wife returned home to accompany her to study.<br /><br />Sunweiguo, farmer <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=%E5%AE%89%E5%BE%BD%E5%85%A8%E6%A4%92&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:nb-NO:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Quanjiao,+%E6%BB%81%E5%B7%9E%E5%B8%82,+%E5%AE%89%E5%BE%BD%E7%9C%81,+%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD&ei=1nAaS5rOE4ri7APMkdnSDw&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ8gEwAA">Quanjiao county</a>, Anhui province<br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-71368042537728819782009-11-29T11:33:00.003+01:002009-11-29T11:43:28.694+01:00A cab driver's confession<span style="font-style:italic;">From <a href="http://www.infzm.com/content/37899">Southern Weekly’s review section page F 29</a>, 26.11.2009</span><br /><span class="fullpost"><br />Saturday around noon, when taking a cab to take care of some stuff, I discovered that there were traffic jams everywhere. The driver said that you can’t make a living on driving nowadays: Every day he has to turn over 160 Yuan to the taxi company and pay more than 100 for gas, so when traffic is like this it’s equal to not taking on passengers at all. Looking around there were cars waiting all over the place, we just sat in the car dawdling the time away.<br /><br />The driver was more than 50 years old and seemed very kind, yet his face was brimmed with helplessness, worry and apathy. As the road was jammed, he put his hands on the steering wheel and said to me (in an old Guiyang accent): “Miss, sometimes, when there’re no passengers, sitting in this car, looking at the traffic jam, I really feel like ending this life”. He often felt like there wasn’t any hope in his life…<br /><br />The ride, which originally would have been around 10 minutes, ended up being more than 40 minutes long. I thought the fare would be crazy, but when I got off, I realized, to my surprise, that it was only 20 Yuan. <br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Gao Dongmei</span> – Manager in a bookstore in Guiyang<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">This translation was made for information purposes only. The views expressed in the article are that of the author and her alone.<br /><br /></span></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-21594515750792574482009-10-23T11:39:00.002+02:002010-03-11T09:38:46.115+01:00A poisonous thornTo a large extent, nationalism isn’t natural, but merely a product of power struggle among countries.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Author:</span> Hefan<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />Link to original essay:</span> <a href="http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_489808d20100fr1w.html ">http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_489808d20100fr1w.html </a>(Chinese)<br /><br />This essay is taken from this year’s eight issue of the magazine “the Soho tabloid” (SOHO 小报), named “The balance between profit and soul”(利润与心灵的平衡). <br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />This translation was made for information purposes only. The views expressed in the article are that of the author and him alone.</span><br /><br /> <br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><br />A poisonous thorn</span><br /><br />To a large extent, nationalism isn’t natural, but merely a product of power struggle among countries.<br /><br />Something that has restricted the people of China (<span style="font-style:italic;">in terms of nationalism, translator's note</span>), and strengthened its ideology, is “the idea of community”.<br /><br />More than 10 years ago, I had just arrived the US to study. It was the first day of school. The school held an orientation for all the exchange students from “ethnic minorities”. What left a profound impression on me was that the teacher speaking, partly serious, partly joking, told us that upon arriving in America we needed to learn an important word: The powerful D. She said that if we ever run into trouble, e.g. getting a ticket for double-parking, we could just say “D…D..D…”, and before we had even finished our sentence, the police would meekly walk away. What kind of word possess such powers? Well, it is Discrimination, in Chinese qíshì (歧视). What Americans really fear the most is being labelled a racist.<br /><br />Hearing this, I just dismissed it with a laugh. However, gradually getting to know the Americans more, I discovered that being a racist is America’s biggest taboo. White Caucasians love to make friends with African Americans, are very fond of the black culture, like adopting children from abroad, enjoy eating at foreign restaurants, believe in religions from other countries, and no matter if they’ve been to Tibet or not, they all put a sticker saying “Free Tibet” on their car bumper, all because they wanna prove they’re not racist. In America, if you’re not cautious about what you say, you will easily end up being labelled a racist. On one occasion, I sat in on an econometrics class. The teacher wrote the symbol “∧” on the black board, stopped cold turkey and made a joke: “This looks like a small Chinese hat”. Before he could even finish his sentence, an American Chinese cried out: “Teacher, what did you just say?”. The teacher’s face went blanch with fear, hasten to explain, he spent about five minutes repeating over and over again that he did not intend to mock neither Chinese or Asian people. He really loved Chinese culture, and explained that his child even was learning Chinese in kindergarten. I was sitting there, both laughing and sighing: Not even Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution behaved like this.<br /><br />Looking on it from the point of progress, to oppose racial discrimination, is Western people’s reaction to their own wrongs of the past. An American friend once told me, the reason why white Caucasians have a guilty conscience about African Americans, is that the ancestors of African Americans were abducted and sold as slaves by white Europeans, clearly not emigrating out of own free will. Therefore today’s white Caucasians feel that they should atone for their ancestor’s sins. Frankly speaking, what white Caucasians in America really should bear the cross of guilt for is their crimes against Native Americans; killing their people, stealing their land. Unfortunately, it seems as though Americans are reluctant to reflect on their maltreatment of Native Americans. I am eager to continue exploring this topic with Americans, but they completely lack interest.<br /><br />This can hardly be considered thorough rethinking, it doesn’t help solving problems of ethnic minorities, it doesn’t raise the moral standard of the West, is also makes the West weak and helpless. Nationalism is the demon the West got after opening Pandora’s Box, this special treatment of ethnic minorities as well as the popular culture pluralism being the angel flying out from the bottom of the box. Regrettably, this feeble angel cannot recall the demon, on the contrary, she has agreed to marry him. The result is that not only won't the demon go away, but instead it continues to multiply. <br /><br />After the collapse of the Roman Empire, Western Europe was left with many small countries, and entered a time of tangled warfare. Originally, the poison of nationalism grew out of this political chaos. To a large extent, nationalism isn’t natural, but merely a product of power struggle among countries and the desire to control a countries population, on the contrary, what strengthens one’s ideology is “the idea of community”. Nationalism increases the differences between communities and leads to hatred and killing. As a quote from Samuel P. Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” goes: “Unless we hate others, we can not love ourselves”. This is exactly what after many years of warfare, ultimately evolved into the national state and capitalism. In the rest of the world nationalism didn’t exist. The West conquered the world and spread their poison all over the place. The Balkans are called “The powder barrel of Europe”, where you have numerous ethnic groups and religions. However, before the Western powers arrived, the local ethnic groups were getting along just fine, everyone living in peace with each other. But after nationalism spread to this area, it exploded into constant warfare. The African country of Rwanda was originally home of many different tribes. In the 1930, the Belgium rulers decided to split the country in two, one called Hutu, one called Tutsi. In the movie “Hotel Rwanda” a Western journalist asks the locals what the difference between the two ethnic groups really is, and the answer is that they have different noses and styles of walking! The conflict that broke out in the 1990’s and ended in genocide, was directly causes by the nationalism introduced by the West.<br /><br />Today's culture pluralism is still causing differences among rigid communities. Despite not being as aggressive as nationalism of the past, forbore and yielded by the West, but the gene is the same. This concept requires differential treatment by ethnic minorities, giving them more compensations and liberties (<span style="font-style:italic;">than the majority, translator's note</span>). Yet, this kind-hearted aspiration have not resulted in satisfaction. The black and white boundaries of the American society are still very distinct, black people are not only unsatisfied, on contrary they are getting more and more indignant. Where's the problem? I'm afraid it's a sidetrack. A long time ago the founders of the United States warned reminded the people to be "United as One". America has always claimed to be "a big melting pot", and what's the outcome, the melting pot has turned into a separator. The situation in Europe is even worse then in America. America is the country in the world most open to immigration, in a steady stream new immigrants bring fresh blood to the country, while Europe has already entered a stage where the population is aging, step by step nearing death. Aging of the population raises immigration issues, but Europe is doing bad job with aspect. On the one hand, Europe's nationalism is even stronger, especially as the racists who make up the drags of society once again gain the upper hand, on the other hand in order to restrain the domestic extreme nationalists, Europe's culture pluralism gets more pacified and weak. In the light of the speed of today's population changes, in 50 years, Europe might be a Muslim world. If Europe doesn't seriously reflect on how to mix and unite different crowds, how to handle the ongoing withering Anglo-Saxon population and differences between the tidal wave of people coming from Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia, then sometime in the near future Europe will disintegrate.<br /><br />Perhaps an archaic state is able to provide the West with some wisdom. Since ancient times China hasn't had a concept of ethnic groups, the Han population include people who in an anthropologic sense are of completely different races, including different religious beliefs, the radiant splendour of various languages, customs and cultures. Actually this is the true melting pot. I once read a book called "Jewish history". The book mentions Jewish people wandering all over the world, encountering supercilious looks from locals, and therefore they chose to preserve their own customs and traditions while being in alien land. One branch of Jews arrived in Henan, China, and was assimilated by the good-hearted peasants. This is the greatest success of ethnic policy.<br /><br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-16005097910159154832009-09-22T08:26:00.003+02:002009-09-22T08:29:24.203+02:00Han ChauvinismDoes Han Chauvinism exist in China? This is indeed a controversial topic. <br /><span class="fullpost"><br />A lot of Han Chinese friends of mine say: How can there be Han chauvinism in China? China only has reverse discrimination. The government has implemented quite a few policies favoring ethnic minorities, e.g. extra points on college entrance exams, reserving local government positions etc. This is all disguised discrimination of the Han; especially in criminal cases, where ethnic minorities less often are arrested, executed and in general get handled leniently, which surely gives the Han a feeling of being treated unfair. Needless to say, the dissatisfaction is justifiable and quite understandable. Even so we have to keep in mind that this so-called big-nationality chauvinism is a typical example of forced assimilation of ethnic minorities. On the basis of this criterion we have to acknowledge that China actually has Han chauvinism. <br /><br />As everyone knows, in China, regional national autonomy is nothing but an empty title. The CCP continue to carry out compulsory Han assimilation policies, policies which have been further intensified in recent years. In Xinjiang, almost all the leading positions with real power (meaning Party power) are in the hands of the Han. Previously there was a Mr. Sai Fuding who served as CP committee secretary, but after him there has never again been an Uyghur serving as first in command in the autonomous region. In the course of 60 years of CCP rule, CCP has trained numerous of Uyghur cadres, how can it be that they are unable to find a single one capable of serving as CP committee secretary. This indicates that the concerned authorities still are anxious about "If they're not cut from the same cloth, their mindset must be different". How can the Uyghurs just let this go? Since Wang Lequan assumed office they have strengthened restrictions on Uyghur culture and religion, demolishing the old town of Kashgar and other traditional buildings of great historic significance, stipulating for the use of Mandarin Chinese instead of Uyghur language in primary schools, and banning or restricting government personnel right to believe in Islam, including not being allowed to grow a beard, wear a turban or fasting and praying at work. Uyghurs celebrating their own traditional holidays are also being restricted, and son and so forth. This cannot but cause Uyghurs with national consciousness and distinctive ethnic features a strong feeling of being discriminated and repressed. In fact, the policies of the authorities towards Uyghurs are: crack down more often than you relax restrictions. The authorities use a high pressure approach and do not tolerate that ethnic minorities have any kind of emotions. If at a meeting an ethnic minority cadre as much as tries to raise a complaint, he is not going to get promoted, maybe even expelled. To ethnic minorities, if this is not Han chauvinism, then what is? <br /><br />Let's take the language issue as an example. That the function of language in everyday life is significant, goes without saying. The so-called Chinese language, as a matter of fact, refers to Han Chinese language. Of course, the Han Chinese make up for more than 90% of China's population, so making Han Chinese language the official language is reasonable. But this also leads to disadvantages for other languages, thereby creating unfavorable conditions for ethnic minorities who have other mother tongues. A speaker of Han Chinese language can travel throughout China without any inconvenience (except for only a handful of remote and underdeveloped areas), yet a speaker of Uyghur language or Tibetan will face difficulties as soon as he leaves his hometown. Actually, if Uyghurs go to inland China without being able to speak Han Chinese language they will be very unpopular. Uyghurs perfectly understand this, and will by no means complain. But the problem today is that because of large numbers of Han Chinese people immigrating to Xinjiang, holding dominant positions in an absolute majority of all fields, it has come to such an extent that even in their own hometowns, the Uyghurs are likely to get turned down when applying for jobs if they do not speak Han Chinese language, and even if they do speak it, there may still not be working opportunities for them, because a lot recruitment ads require people to be Han Chinese. From a Uyghur’s point of view, is this not indeed Han chauvinism? <br /><br />On the web there is circulating an essay called “I’ll tell you about the real Urumqi” by an author which calls himself “Second generation army”. This essay discusses a very interesting phenomenon: In Xinjiang, on Han Chinese holidays, the Uyghurs also get off work. On Uyghur holidays, the Han Chinese go to work as normal. It looks as if the Han Chinese are treated unfair, “but if you think carefully, you’ll discover an unexpected secret. Because of this illustration… In Xinjiang, everything can be done without any concern for Uyghur participation or normal regulations." Thus it can be seen that in their own hometowns Uyghurs are already left behind. A lot of Uyghurs already feel that they have become minorities in their own hometowns; they are marginalized culturally, and are an economically underprivileged group. They feel as if their own home is on the brink of being lost. What’s even worse is that Uyghurs have no channels of communications as to express their dissatisfaction and suffering. If they turn to the authorities, the authorities will often just ignore them, if they publish something online the authorities will simply just charge them with “violation of national unity, and an attempt to split the nation” and take them into custody. <br /><br />Here, most average Han Chinese are not getting any special treatment, but Uyghurs on the other hand cannot but feel their interests are being violated. A lot of Uyghurs are not jut dissatisfied with the authorities, but also with Han Chinese people. Ethnic relations have become very tense. What really has created this situation is the authorities not paying attention to the needs of the ethnic minorities and carrying out policies of mandatory Sinicism. On the other hand this tells us that we can not solve these problem until we have implemented real minority autonomy. <br /><br />Author: Hu Ping, editor of Beijing Spring<br /><br />Link to original essay: http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/pinglun/huping-08312009100006.html<br /><br />This translation was made for information purposes only. The views expressed in the article are that of the author and him alone.<br /><br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-35234052674955455132009-02-02T16:16:00.006+01:002009-02-04T11:28:39.029+01:00Central Military Comission calls for armed forces' obedience<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj01EwP0-M-Tj20qUVbW9udD6FJU1ZR77bu4YgMC4LbfebadKpej1yZCL3R1AqlXFRzb706H7fRvPgcKP9AYkHRi2JjewD14ZvyW4fZQMwINA0tlv8d3Jhmm5vggs9E-BWkPWWSETWTmdU/s1600-h/IMG_2141.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj01EwP0-M-Tj20qUVbW9udD6FJU1ZR77bu4YgMC4LbfebadKpej1yZCL3R1AqlXFRzb706H7fRvPgcKP9AYkHRi2JjewD14ZvyW4fZQMwINA0tlv8d3Jhmm5vggs9E-BWkPWWSETWTmdU/s320/IMG_2141.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5298239050404045410" /></a><br />An interesting <a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-02/01/content_10747814.htm">press release</a> from the Central Military Commision (CMC) yesterday calling for all military forces to stay loyal to the chain of command raises a lot of question.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br />The essence of the statement is very much summarized in the following sentence:<br /><br /> "All military forces should unify their will to the decision and deployment of the CPC Central Committee to ensure that they "uncompromisingly obey the Party and Central Military Commission's command at any time and under any circumstances"<br /><br />There is no doubt that this year will be a challenging one for the Communist Party. The economic downturn has already resulted in <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/20_million_migrant_workers_out_of_work_in_China_Govt/articleshow/4063901.cms">20 million migrant workers losing their jobs</a>, it's 20 years since the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_incident">Tiananmen incident</a> (that's the term used by Chinese officals, but most of us would probably agree that "massacre" might be a better word to describe it), and it's 50 years since Dalai Lama <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/world/asia/20tibet.html">fleed to India.</a><br /><br />The central goverment seems anxious about the possibility of massive civil unrest. All criticism a side, you have to give them credit for taking the situation serious. The way I see it, this press release is not meant as a threat or an ultimatum to the public,but is a result of a typical Chinese way of thinking: plan for the worst. The Chinese communist party seems much more adaptable now than just a few years back. They are starting to realize that without economic stability (in China, that means massive GDP growth) people might really start to <a href="http://facesofchina.blogspot.com/2008/12/chapter-08.html">question their rulers.</a><br /><br />To me as an economic <a href="http://www.mandarintools.com/cgi-bin/wordlook.pl?word=%E5%A4%96%E8%A1%8C&searchtype=chinese&where=whole&audio=on">外行</a> it seems like the Chinese government is the only government so far that has <a href="http://chineseculture.about.com/od/thechinesegovernment/a/Chinaeconomy.htm">taken the financial crises serious</a>. Maybe that's because they know what's at stake, but nevertheless, they seem very aware of the challenges their facing, and more important, ready to deal with them.<br /><br />A year ago people were talking about the possibility of the Chinese economy <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7288940.stm">getting too hot</a>, and we should remember that even though the so-called experts might be right when they say that China seeds an annual growth around 10 % in order to keep the public on their side, we are not talking about a situation like the one we're facing in the western world, but merely an annual GDP growth <a href="http://www.economist.com/countries/CHINA/profile.cfm?folder=Profile-Forecast">around 8 %</a>. <br /><br />Looks like it's gonna be (another) interesting year for China.<br /><br />Photo: Flag ceremony at 天安门, 1. May 2008 <br />Photographer: André Holthe<br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-2698271475238840622009-01-15T16:27:00.003+01:002009-01-15T23:46:14.615+01:00Charter 08 – The aftermath<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhls2Zoxl0dZpevI82Kgmhu3ZfMRIDYkZJdM3HOvSo8iELcOzRiRqbDZw-LFOw62wnEnPHm95ddSNoWMgNbT62-aYgA4vbsle92kZQechdxBmtHu_my7Gldm4y9Uc3OHrFAfGuDg_QZk1Q/s1600-h/censorship.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 169px; height: 169px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhls2Zoxl0dZpevI82Kgmhu3ZfMRIDYkZJdM3HOvSo8iELcOzRiRqbDZw-LFOw62wnEnPHm95ddSNoWMgNbT62-aYgA4vbsle92kZQechdxBmtHu_my7Gldm4y9Uc3OHrFAfGuDg_QZk1Q/s320/censorship.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5291542972286248898" /></a><br />For quite some time I’ve wanted to write an update of the reactions following Charter 08. But then I read <a href="http://www.insideoutchina.com/2009/01/china-revolution-or-reform-summary-of.html">this</a> great post over at Inside-Out China, which pretty much gives you everything you need to know about the topic. <br /><br />Go ahead and read <a href="http://www.insideoutchina.com/2009/01/china-revolution-or-reform-summary-of.html">it</a>. It’s truly a great and informative summary of the events so far.André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-23479162942568904732008-12-10T16:08:00.010+01:002008-12-12T14:18:57.466+01:00Charter 08 (零八宪章)Today is December 10th, and for all it's worth, exactly sixty years ago the <a href="http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html">Universal Declaration </a>of Human Rights was signed. In China, that event was celebrated by a group of influential intellectuals who published "Charter 08", a pamphlet in remembrance of the <a href="http://libpro.cts.cuni.cz/charta/docs/declaration_of_charter_77.pdf">1977 pamphlet</a> by Havel and his friends in Prague. Among the people who signed the document is Liu Xiaobo, one of China's leading critics and 'intellectual enfant terribile'. Liu was arrested yesterday, and for now is still in prison. "Charter 08" calls for thorough reforms and democratization. Perry Link translated it for the New York Review. <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22210">Read it</a>, and the floor is opened for debate! If anyone manages to find the chinese version, please let me know.<br />First questions I would like to pose:<br />So the document is published today, and Perry Link translated it today? He must have received a copy beforehand. Which leads to my next question: Who will read this document IN China? I am 99% sure that the People's Daily will kindly decline the offer. <br />Furthermore, "Change is no longer optional"? This kind of talk will not please Zhongnanhai...<br />Pay special attention to the repeated mentioning of "basic and universal values". Do they mean "western values"? Or are democracy and republicanism universal? <br /><br />Time for debate!<br /><br />Thomas de Groot<br />December 10th 2008<br /><br />Update: the Chinese document is <a href="http://www.dwnews.com/gb/MainNews/Forums/BackStage/2008_12_9_0_53_49_851.html">here</a>. With a list of all the people who signed...<br />Update 2: The document was deliberately published online. But so far I haven't seen any reaction on the BBS-forums. Will the portals apply auto-censorship?<br />Update 3: The first real reply by a "left wing" intellectual was just released by Wang Xizhe on his blog. <a href="http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200812b.brief.htm#006">ESWN has the translation</a>. Earlier this week, the debate on China's future was started by Yu Keping, one of the closest advisors to Hu Jintao, <a href="http://cmp.hku.hk/2008/12/11/1429/">by an interview </a>he gave to several newspapers. It seems it is going to be an interesting winter.Thomas de Groothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08869588218160539862noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-41680948609914592372008-11-23T02:36:00.006+01:002008-11-23T14:18:49.133+01:00The King is dead - Long live the KingI've always been very fascinated by the American dream. Not the dream itself, but the way it was marketed and spread to every corner of the world. Just the fact that I, not being an English native speaker, find it not only useful, but also natural to write this post in English clearly shows who won the Cold War. Another noteworthy fact is that I used the word "market", a slightly more positive word than it's counter part used to describe similiar Russian culture export during the same period, this so-called "propaganda", even though it basically was the same act. The winner takes it all, ey?<br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH22cvhJUS_uRUmqV4YcHfU2kL34qXYAA27MUWooMkB13wgjLQVd3_zhcGfm60e7IPTIb9d8UUzkXDlX-Uvtaj-PammOeAzQ5JKtRyuMeRWhvM5Hu11Vb7Q5ezfY4wW5bQF8_uM8Zvc6c/s1600-h/Chinese+century.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 209px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiH22cvhJUS_uRUmqV4YcHfU2kL34qXYAA27MUWooMkB13wgjLQVd3_zhcGfm60e7IPTIb9d8UUzkXDlX-Uvtaj-PammOeAzQ5JKtRyuMeRWhvM5Hu11Vb7Q5ezfY4wW5bQF8_uM8Zvc6c/s320/Chinese+century.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5271678314743626162" /></a><br />So, where does China fit in all this? Well, as recent history shows, being a world super-power is not only about economic and military power, but also about the ability to promote values. This is why I've always been very hostile to the idea that the 21st century is going to be Chinese, as an increasing amount of people seem to believe. To me, the idea that China is going go global with it's culture, as the Americans did with the American Dream, is all very absurd. Chinese culture seems to be way too introvert for that to happen, not only at present, but historically. They don't seem to have the ambition or motivation to export their culture to the extent that the Americans did, and still are doing. Most people in the western world seems to feel that the American dream is passé, but the fact still remains: Although the admiration of America in post-World War 2 Europe probably was stronger than it is today, my generation has a life much more like that of the American dream, than those who grew up 30, 40 years ago. It's not until now that we are actually living the dream.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Dream of a white collar life</span><br /><br />But maybe I've been to egocentric, only viewing the world as the U.S., Europe and some Asian countries. What if the Chinese and the Africans get along and decide to leave us out of the equation? Africa has every right to be skeptical towards us Europeans; throughout history we've caused them nothing but harm and China could be seen as a more suitable companion. Check out <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003941241_chinadreams11.html">this </a> article in the Seattle Times, entitled <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003941241_chinadreams11.html">The American Dream Now Made in China</a>, for more on the subject.<br /><br />André Holthe, November 2008 <br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-46362169035475728872008-11-16T03:46:00.005+01:002009-02-27T01:17:44.907+01:00Obama not suitable for being President<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwZXHKB0bdhAEYzalWe16e8Gtl5DPOp7vd8Hsk8AxNLnMEn4Loo6Nn6aNdNacPNOaMUQ4quVvUZdSUDg81CkZ1SPog7rhnJtDHHr19S4aPxBukNS0eNwdF9i_qNclI6s46xvbOosnMmNM/s1600-h/obamao.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 239px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwZXHKB0bdhAEYzalWe16e8Gtl5DPOp7vd8Hsk8AxNLnMEn4Loo6Nn6aNdNacPNOaMUQ4quVvUZdSUDg81CkZ1SPog7rhnJtDHHr19S4aPxBukNS0eNwdF9i_qNclI6s46xvbOosnMmNM/s320/obamao.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5269085704012833074" /></a><br />Last week Senator Barack Obama was elected President of the US. Not only was he able to gain the trust of the majority of Americans, but it seems that a vast majority of the world's population was in favour of Obama. <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE49M1RU20081023">According to an online poll</a> conducted on the China daily website by the U.S embassy, 75 percent of Chinese people supports Obama, despite the fact that <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/article3274689.ece">the Chinese government tried to dampen popular enthusiasm</a> for an Obama win in the American election. <br /><br />I guess the high support rates for Obama abroad is partly a result of 8 years under the rule of George W. Bush, probably the most unpopular American President ever, but Obama has nevertheless done a great job conviencing the world that he is up for the task.<br /><br />With the US facing a financial crises (and a likely recession to come with it) and two major wars abroad, we should all hope he is. <br /><span class="fullpost"><br />But, American spending is decreasing and with that Chinese exports. Already factories in China are starting to lay off people, and this is probably just the beginning. Naturally, Chinese government officials are not very fond of the fact that Obama is likely to try and save the US economy by raising import taxes and implenting other barriers that will unfavour Chinese exports. <br /><br />Personally, I have to say am really surprised that Obama enjoys such high rates of support in China. With Obama being black, I would have thought that he would receive hostile criticism from a significant number of Chinese. In general Chinese people have a skeptical attitude towards black people. One could argue that this applies only for the uneducated, but in China that is still a vast majority of the population. I remember taking a cab in Beijing earlier this year, and for some reason the topic of different races ended up being discussed, and I still can't shake one of the things my driver said to me "You know, we Chinese don't quite yet live in a fully developed country, like you white people do, but some day we will. At least we're better than the blacks!". <br /><br />But with this being said, I can understand why the Chinese do seem to love Obama, he does indeed represent something close to the American dream. And if there's one thing I've learn about Chinese it's that they are very much like Americans. I can already hear you all laugh at this statement, but I really mean it. When it comes to being competetive, whether it's in education, business, sports or a social context, Americans and Chinese think and behave very similar. They all have a strong believe in being a self made man, if you don't make it; if you don't make it, there's got to be something wrong with you as an individual. <br /><br />This post was actually supposed to be a translation of a Chinese blog post with just a brief introduction. So, let's cut to the chase.<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.bullog.cn/blogs/qianliexian/archives/213129.aspx">Link to original article</a> (in Chinese)<br />Author: Unknown <br />"<br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">Obama, you're not suitable for being the President of the United States of America!</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">1. Lack of real experience</span><br />There's a saying in China: "Those who suffer, will one day get their chance - What goes around comes around." (lit. A daughter-in-law who suffers will one day become a mother-in-law). Look at you, a senator, a federal senator - now President. You should know that being a senator is not really dealing with adminstrative matters, it's more like being a People's Congress delegate, meaning when you next year assume office, you have never been in charge of real administrative duties, you have never really dealt with any matters of real importants. In other words, you, who has not even served as a country magistrate, is going to serve as President!? Take a look at China, are there really any high officals who has laddered to the top without doing it step by step? They all have plenty of experience from real life communities. But with your qualifications!? Sweet dreams!<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;">2. Way too young</span><br />When China in 2006 elected members for the standing comittee, the youngest to be chosen was 53 years old, and that was after fall is just to make the cadres younger in average age. When introducing them, our leaders addressed them in a conceited tone. Being Commander of Chief by the age of 47, isn't that a quite obvious signal for China? Will you be able to provide a rudder for your country, with no one there to help you? Will you be able to lead the reformation? I suggest that after you come to power, you let old fellows like Bush and Clinton work together to give you some pointers, this way the citizens of your country can feel relived. Remember, keep the vessel steady!<br /><br />"<br /><br />According to the blog where I found this post, it is uncertain if this was written as a joke or just to provoke, nevertheless, I put it up to show at least one thing: The difference between how western democracies are electing their leaders through general elections and how China more and more is turning into a steady technocracy, a society in which those who govern justify themselves by appeal to technical experts who justify themselves by appeal to scientific forms of knowledge. In these troubled financial times, it is tempting to support the latter.<br /><br />Update: Due to the Chinese government envoking new censorship laws, bullog.cn has been forced to close. The original blogpost of my translation is therefore unavailable. I'll see if I can find another version of it and update the link...<br /><br />André Holthe, November 2008<br /></span>André Holthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15229141387866565994noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-45689036288734925902008-11-12T20:40:00.004+01:002008-11-13T23:22:42.048+01:00Faces of China<a href="http://facesofchina.net/articles/10/faces-of-china" rel="bookmark">Faces of China</a><br /><br /><br />Most foreigners who live in China say that Hong Kong is one of the most pleasant places to go to. You can sit in the park, drink your latte and read the Herald Tribune of today. In the afternoon you can go to Times Square and protest for the Falun Gong and before going to bed you can browse through the latest anti-Mao biography, that you bought legally and with a slight touch of pride. Even more people who live in China, once they set foot on Hong Kong, have the tendency to say bad things about Mainland China. It is very easy to criticise the Mainland, because the differences with Hong Kong are so obvious. Not only the apparent freedom but also the smells, the air quality, the traffic, the service, everything is just a little more advanced, modern or pleasant (that’s twice that I use that word in one introduction). What makes Hong Kong so different?<br /><br /><span class="fullpost">No one can appreciate Hong Kong like we can, the international students, expatriates and globetrotters who are fortunate enough to live in China for sometime. On the other hand, I know people like us, who live in Hong Kong but have never been to the Mainland. Their understanding of China is limited to what they have experienced in Hong Kong, that strange and obscure place that really doesn’t fit in with the rest of China. In fact, the whole selling point of Hong Kong is just that: it is not China. China knows this, and the Communist Party uses this for their own purposes. The investment that is fuelling the Chinese economy mostly comes through Hong Kong. The HKSAR (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) government does the same thing. They manifest themselves as the alternative to the CCP, as something special.<br />But in the end the “one country, two systems”-concept is still the bottom line. Hong Kong is organising the equestrian event of the Olympics, just so everyone knows that it is part of China. Even, or even more, outside of politics, Hong Kong is China. The people speak Chinese, they eat noodles, pray to Buddha and make money. They light fireworks during the Spring festival and write in Chinese characters. Traditional characters, so you could even say that Hong Kong is more Chinese than the Mainland. A lot of Chinese culture was erased during the Cultural Revolution, and the current leaders of the CCP really don’t seem to be that eager to bring Confucius and Daoism back to the grassroots. The fact that Chinese culture survives a century of British colonial rule, more than it resists a couple of decades of enraged Maoists, says something about the impact of Maoism.<br />While I am sitting on the crossing of Canton Road and Peking Road, drinking my obligatory Starbucks-latte, I can’t help but wonder why the difference in feeling or vibe as you will, between the Mainland and Hong Kong is so evident. What was it that made this atmosphere so completely incomparable? Is it the Communist Party? Or the British? Is it merely the difference in development (Hong Kong is richer than most European countries, where as most people on the mainland live without running water or electric heating)? Or is it all because of the impact of Mao Zedong?<br />It is not about what is the real China, or what China should be like. We live here, we study Chinese and we try to understand the situation. This part of the world will determine the history of the 21st century. It is for all of us that we need to understand “China”, not just the PRC or the HKSAR. For future references, it is probably more interesting to underline the things these two administrative entities and their respective peoples have in common. You will find that the common ground between the PRC, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau is what makes Chinese culture.<br />My latte is enjoyably warm and the atmosphere feels like home, like a big city in the West. But then I see the news on the television. A tragedy is unfolding in the south of Mainland China. Millions of people, mostly migrant workers and students who plan to spend their only free time in the year to help their families in the countryside, are trying to get home for the Spring festival. But for the first time in fifty years snow is falling on Guangdong and Yunan. Electric cables break, roads are blocked, trains stop working, airports are closed. The whole country falls to a meltdown. ‘The collapse of the infrastructure is worrying for the future’, writes The New York Times. ‘The snow has surprised us all’, says The China Daily. But no one writes about what I am looking at. Images that make you shiver, images that are hard to forget. Thousands of people, tired and cold, hungry and stressed. Waiting in the blistering cold for days, outside in front of the train station. They are being told that there will not be any trains to their hometown, not this week. Authorities are saying they should go back to where they came from. Back to the big city where they work. Or spend the New Year on the street in front of the station. Carrying a year’s collection of stuff to bring to their families, they don’t seem to be considering the options the government is giving them. This week is the only free time they have. They haven’t seen their loved ones for a year. They deserve to go home. What strikes me most is the greyness, their faces full of desperation. If there is one thing I will remember of my time in the PRC it is the face of an ordinary Chinese guy. Panic breaks out. The mass of tired and overloaded people is too big for the square. A stampede starts. People have to fight to survive, as always in this country. People die, get swallowed by the stampede that once it moves is unstoppable. There are no official numbers but the images don’t look good. How do you explain to them, that they will not make it home this year? Why did this happen? Why, in a country where the Olympics are supposed to mark a new era for China, where the 2010 World-Expo is supposed to emphasize its economic hegemony? Why do the ordinary people have to suffer so much?<br />A week later I spent a night in a train with some young people who had been stuck on that square in Guangzhou. They had waited five days on the streets. They had lost their luggage in the stampede. They had to wait for thirty hours for some drinking water and some instant noodles. They hadn’t showered the whole week. But they smiled, because they were on a train now. At two thirty in the morning, the train suddenly stopped. Three boys of seven were spotted in the headlights of the train. The police went out to check if they were killed or if they were just hurt. Three young and completely exhausted boys were carried onto the train. One of them had broken his foot when they tried to jump on our moving train. Why? They were walking from Nanning to Wuzhou, about 500 kilometres, to get home to their families. They didn’t have money for a train ticket. So they decided to jump on one. Lucky as they were to have survived such a stunt, they looked as miserable as I have ever seen anyone. For me, these are the incidents that give this summer’s Olympics a bitter taste. It is one of the reasons why I will not cheer during the opening ceremony.<br />Looking at the images of people stuck in the snow or waiting for a train, in a coffee place in Hong Kong is ironic for two reasons. First of all, if I hadn’t been in Hong Kong I would have never seen these images, because the CCP didn’t think it would be suitable for the Chinese citizens to see these terrible scenes. So the images never made it to the television or the newspaper on the Mainland. Second of all, seeing the People’s Republic from a lazy chair in a warm bar in Hong Kong makes you realise something very fundamental. The misery and suffering is exactly what is missing in Hong Kong. Or the other way around, the hardships people endure on the Mainland is what makes it such a different experience. Despite my anger at what I was seeing on the news, I had a crying urge to get back to the Mainland. I got sick of Hong Kong after three days. I wanted to go back to those people, who are always curious and warm hearted. Driving on the super modern and air-conditioned and fully automatic subway from Central back to Tsim Sha Tsui-station, I couldn’t wait to be back in those smelly old trains where people spit on the floor and shout at each other.<br /><br />Thomas de Groot, Beijing, February, 2008<br /><br /></span>Thomas de Groothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08869588218160539862noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-59146678502039878602008-11-12T20:35:00.005+01:002008-11-13T23:18:09.203+01:00The Outsider's View from the Inside<a href="http://facesofchina.net/articles/18/the-outsiders-view-from-the-inside-hazy-reflections-on-china-today" rel="bookmark">The outsider's view from the inside – hazy reflections on China today</a><br /><br /><br />”No man can justly censure or condemn another, because indeed no man truly knows another”<br />(Thomas Browne)<br /><br />Arriving China for the first time, in western media described as a nation still concealed by the darkness of communism, we all know what to expect. A demoralized people ruled by a despotic government who governs the country as they like. No opportunity for the individuals to decide for themselves. A dull life where serving the country is the only thing that keeps you from dying of boredom. Or, do we really?<br /><span class="fullpost"><br />Exiting Beijing Capital airport and taking your first steps on Chinese soil, apart from the polluted air and the crowded streets, what is your first impression of China? Is it Censorship? Unless the first thing you do is to shout out something obscure about free Tibet, this is very unlikely. Maybe it’s just me, a narrow-minded student whose perception of this country differ greatly from that of others, but believe it or not, my first thought was freedom.<br />Woe unto those who think that this interpretation has anything to do with a fascination for capital punishment, forced labour or censorship. To believe this is making a small, nevertheless fatal error. My point is merely a matter of observing the obvious presence of positive aspects in this society. In any case, let’s return to the topic.<br />In the morning, in the evening, what’s most delightful?<br />Personally, I truly enjoy the freedom of living in Beijing. To most westerners, the freedom provided in China is a new kind of freedom. When it comes to everyday life, Beijing is a society of great breadth and wisdom with people distinguished by the largeness and scopes of their views. Despite the size of the city (some say that including its suburbs Beijing is larger than Holland) within most neighbourhoods you will find everything you need during a normal week. A bank, a local grocery store and tons of restaurants, all within the range a five minutes walk. If you’re hungry, no matter where you are in Beijing you don’t have to walk more than a block to get tasty and inexpensive food at all hours of the night. More important though, you can eat it in the restaurant, on the sidewalk or just wrap it up and bring it home. If you think fast food and take away was invented in the United States, you are sadly mistaken. I don’t think I’ve ever waited more than ten minutes for my food, regardless of what time it is. And close to half of all the places that sell food are just stands, hence the take away.<br />This is not revolutionary city planning, but what is remarkable is that after ten p.m. Beijing is quiet, even though you’ll still be able to get a snack, a beer and a haircut. Most metropolitan areas around the world are all known for one aspect: the never ending street noises. Beijing, on the contrary, actually goes to sleep. Beijing not only provides the Beijinger with an extraordinary chance to save time by utilizing the means at hand, but also to relax and get a good night’s sleep. Freedom of having a choice, as the Americans would say.<br />Individuality vs. Commitment<br />Okay, the Beijing life is many ways convenient. What else? Well, what I would like to focus on is how people live their lives here. The quintessence of human life is to survive. When you are able to do so, you are presented with a choice, for whom do you keep living for? Back home we very much live for ourselves. Your interests become studies, then work and somewhere in between you find a partner. No man is completely free, but this is at least the way we like to see ourselves. As pure and free individuals.<br />If not being the Western counterpart, Chinese society does indeed represent something very different. To me it seems like Chinese people not only live for a greater cause, but they accept that it limits their individual freedom. In other words, just like us, they want to accomplish their goals, they want success. But it doesn’t have to be individual. They have a devotion of time and wealth to their families.<br />I acknowledge that I could never really live in a society that denies the existence of true individuals in the way Chinese society does. I will gladly confess an inability to understand this. But there is a significant part of me that admires this virtue. I want to scream about suppression of feelings, dreams, and opinions, but as a matter of fact I envy these people for understanding something I don’t. Like this old man having a cigarette on the sidewalk, smiling like he grasped something, something that the rest of us didn’t understand. The way he will stand completely still, while the people just walk on by.<br />Happiness is a warm gun<br />During the weeks following the recent developments in Tibet, people all over the world have criticized the Chinese government for their handling of the situation. As the Beijing Olympics get closer, the criticism increases. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, and I am not denying the errors committed in China. Still there is something terribly wrong about the attitude of most people writing about China.<br />The Western media’s view represents a consensus of opinion that China has nothing to offer our society. The core of the accusations is usually that the wrongs committed by the Chinese, which we seek to condemn and punish, have been so calculated, so malignant and so devastating that civilization cannot tolerate them being ignored. But if China would become a democratic nation according to Western standards then it will all change, right?<br />Many Western scholars have said that democracy and only democracy will lead to economic development. China has proved them wrong. So, when we now preach democracy as the ultimate goal for a society, isn’t there a chance that we are wrong again? Thoughts and ideas have never been improved on the basis of ignorance. Of course we are obligated to preserve our liberties as free citizens, but by stating that our way of thinking is flawless, we are not only acting terribly arrogant, we are also denying ourselves the opportunity of progress.<br />One could say that the Western imperialistic arrogance and the Chinese obstinate thought that no one can teach them anything combined is the worst possible starting point for dialogue. I see people trying to put out the Olympic torch in London, and on the other side angry counterdemonstrations in front of foreign enterprises in China, and I can’t help but shake my head. It’s like this young couple meeting for the first time; she is too young to fall in love, and he is too young to know.<br />André Holthe, Beijing April, 2008<br /><span style="color:green;"></span></span>Thomas de Groothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08869588218160539862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-68686653381162682282008-11-12T20:24:00.016+01:002008-11-13T23:40:43.779+01:00Grassroots Democracy in Rural China<p><br /><br /><br />Grassroots Democracy in Rural China<br /><br />How effective are the villagers committees, and do they represent an institutionalization towards real democracy?<br /><br /><br />Thomas de Groot<br /><br />Leiden University, Faculty of Humanities, School for Asian Studies<br /><br />Course: Political Reform in Contemporary China<br />Instructor: T. W. Ngo<br /><br /><span class="fullpost"><br />10-11-2008<br /><br />...Two bowls (one filled with rice and the other half-filled with water) are placed on the underside of the village god’s stake. Then the presiding monk picks up an egg, breaks it and slides the contents into the bowl with water. Each of the candidates takes a thatch stalk and breaks it at one end to make a hook-shaped tip and then places it against the side of the bowl. The monk covers the bowls with a dustpan cover and scatters some rice over the cover while chanting. Half an hour later, he removes the dustpan cover and tries to pick the egg in the bowl with the hook-tipped thatch stalks made by the candidates. The candidate whose stack hook hooks the egg white is believed to be the divinely ordained kaxie<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a>...<br /><br />(Election process for the divine Kaxie of the Lahu-people on the Lancang-river)<br /><br /><br /><br />INTRODUCTION<br /><br />China scholars have been wrestling to find appropriate terms to describe the Chinese situation as the People’s Republic enters the twenty-first century<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">[2]</a>. It’s system is not democratic, but there are elections on the village level. China claims to be a Socialist state, but the Chinese market economy has driven the country to the position of international financial power broker. The questions are numerous. Is China moving towards democracy? Have the rural reforms made in the past thirty or so years made a real difference? Does it generally mean that when elections are held, be it at the village-level, that a system is more democratic, more free? Do free –or semi-free, elections equal political participation? What are the underlying principles or motives that moved the leadership to introduce political reform? What does the economic development mean for China’s political landscape? In this paper I shall try to analyze two questions that are equally puzzling. How efficient are the Villagers Committees in governing rural affairs? Do the village elections signal a move towards significant democracy?<br /><br />HOW DID VILLAGERS COMMITTEES COME ABOUT ?<br /><br />Let me first quickly characterize the current situation in the politics of rural China. When the Chinese government introduced the household-responsibility-system in 1983<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3">[3]</a>, the traditional production-brigades disappeared. The socialist commune system with it’s production brigades started to whither, as farmers could now freely sell their land. Families were free to seek a profitable way of exploiting the land that they now really owned<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4">[4]</a>. Apart from economical independence, this development also meant that the authority of the production leader didn’t exist anymore. The economic reforms, set out in 1978 by Deng Xiaoping, thus also created a need for administrative changes<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5">[5]</a>. Production was privatized, and now there was a power-vacuum on the lowest level of administration. Two villages in Guanxi Province (independently) put together a makeshift villagers committee in 1981 to solve this vacuum of power. The revolutionary aspect of these committees was that they functioned as a governing body for the villagers, by the villagers. Interestingly, the authorities were never consulted<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn6" name="_ftnref6">[6]</a>. In an article written for the China Quarterly in 2000, China scholars O’Brien and Li show how the reforms came to be. They tell of Peng Zhen, a member of the politburo who became inspired by the actions of these villages in Guanxi. It was thanks to his efforts that the Villagers Committees were written into the constitution. In 1984, the Villagers Committees were officially noted in the Organic Rules on Villagers Committees. In 1988, after fierce lobbying by Peng Zhen, the Organic Law for Villagers Committees was implemented nationwide. However, after the Tiananmen square-incident and it’s Pro-Democracy Movement in 1989 the conservatives within the Party found new reasons to oppose institutionalization of villagers self-governance. It was again Peng Zhen who campaigned to keep the law from being abolished. By 1993, the majority of Chinese villages had held elections to compose a representative Villagers Committee.<br /><br /><br />HOW ARE VILLAGES GOVERNED?<br /><br />Before we look at the degree of openness in these elections, and see how free they really are, let us first investigate the functioning of these Villagers Committees. The Chinese village is the lowest level of administration. It is ruled by two bodies: the Villagers Assembly (村民会议 / cunmin huiyi ) and the Villagers Committee (村民委员会 / cunmin weiyuanhui ). In theory, the Assembly is more powerful than the Committee<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7">[7]</a>. According to a study done by Oi and Rozelle in 2000, the Villagers Assembly was designed to be a directly elected body to represent the National People’s Congress on the lowest level. However, as the Ministry of Civil Affairs put it, this proved inefficient. They changed the directly democratic structure of the Assemblies to a representative system. In 2000, the Villagers Representative Assembly had replaced the Villagers Assembly in half of all the villages. Oi and Rozelle show that the authority of the Assemblies is limited, because the attendance of the members is halfhearted, the assemblies are still largely crowded with unelected (CCP-) members, and their study also shows that the assemblies convene very infrequently. An average of twice a year does not exactly display capability to decide on every day affairs. So then should it be the Villagers Committee to have the day-to-day authority? The Villagers Committees are compiled by members of the party and villagers representatives. They are elected every three years through village elections. It seems that the traditional production team leader from the Mao- era has been replaced by these committees. Oi and Rozelle seem to think that the real decision making takes place in these committees, or amongst the local Party cadres of course<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8">[8]</a>. But now that production is privatized, what is the role of the village leadership? According to the Organic Law for Villagers Committees, it is the committee’s responsibility to develop public services, manage public affairs, mediate civil disputes, help maintain social stability and report to the villagers opinions, requests and suggestions<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn9" name="_ftnref9">[9]</a>. This doesn’t really tell us much. Maybe it is good to look at individual villages to see what the tasks of the local leadership are.<br /><br />A CLOSER LOOK AT THE VILLAGES<br /><br />Peking University’s Rong Ma investigated the political reforms in a Mongolian grasslands village called Hurqige. Rong explains that under the old system of production brigades, the livestock and farmland was divided equally among the villagers by the leaders. Production was managed centrally, as was the annual harvest. Now, the farmers are their own boss, and the production team leader, now called the Villagers Committee, is left with the task of overseeing the taxation. Even though the members of the committees still act as community leaders, Rong puts it, their function is quite limited these days<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn10" name="_ftnref10">[10]</a>. However, we must keep in mind that in the smallest villages, particularly those whose prime economic base is agriculture, life has been roughly the same for a thousand years. The typical Chinese village consists of a few households who farm their land and raise their livestock, and continue to do so, no matter the administrative changes that the central government makes. Yang Shenming shows how irrelevant any village leadership is, especially as a representative of the central government, to a small town community. He tells of the Tajik people in the Tashikuergan Tajik Autonomous Region in the far North-West of China. What this study shows is that the Villagers Committees do not have a great role in the daily lives of the villagers, because they are largely autarchic in their survival. They have been raising sheep for centuries. There is hardly any economy to manage, and the community is so tight that the taxation is being done routinely by the village elders. Again, the leadership of the Villagers Committee is mostly ceremonial<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn11" name="_ftnref11">[11]</a>.<br />EFFECTIVITY OF VILLAGERS COMMITTEES<br /><br />So we shouldn’t look at the smallest farming communities when investigating the functioning of village leadership. What about the larger villages, where the economy is supported by industry and service sectors? Many scholars have pointed to the different links between economy and rural governance. It seems that the more industrialized villages have a greater interest in the proper functioning of their local authorities. Not only is the need for local infra-structure much more obvious, but in an industrialized economy, the linkage with the outside world is very strong. Villagers need proper representation to maximize their profits. Also, when farming is industrialized, the market for farmland is a big motor for the local economy. The regulatory body for this market is supervised by the Villagers Committee, and so we can state that the dependency of the villagers on the local leadership is much greater. What this dependency implies, is that the committee has a great role in rural governance<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn12" name="_ftnref12">[12]</a>. We can conclude that the role local government has in village affairs differs depending on the base of the economy of the village. As many have pointed out, when villagers have a clear interest in the well functioning of the local leaders, this means two things: the role of a village committee is not solely ceremonial, and there is a greater chance for increased democratization. I will address the forces behind this grassroots democracy later on in my paper. For now we can say that the efficiency of such a small administrative entity as the Villagers Committee fully depends on the economy of the village. As a production leader, it’s part may have been played out, but the leader of a community can play a big role in helping to further develop the economy. There is, in short, a definite rationality for the existence of Villagers Committees in China.<br /><br />DEMOCRATIZATION<br /><br />What can we say, then, about the “gradual democratization” people keep talking about? My research question is whether the village elections, now common practice all over China, represent a move towards grassroots democracy. First of all, let me state that this supposed moved towards democracy is not directly linked to the underlying intentions of the government. Whatever the central leadership, being Leninist in it’s core<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn13" name="_ftnref13">[13]</a>, plans on doing with China, the fact of the matter is that in 2000, free or semi-free elections were held in 734.715 of China’s nine hundred thousand or so villages<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn14" name="_ftnref14">[14]</a>. It is said that the introduction of villagers self-governance and direct elections for villagers committees was merely a tool to keep the rural population from rioting<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn15" name="_ftnref15">[15]</a>. In fact, most publications I read on the matter implicitly stated that the economic reforms created cause for social unrest and to allow for civil participation was the central government’s answer. Even more brilliantly, Tan and Pastor argue that the government needs the grassroots democracy for when the economy goes down. “The government will need an escape valve for the people to release their frustrations”<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn16" name="_ftnref16">[16]</a>. Western scholars seem truly disappointed that the introduction of democracy in China wasn’t ideologically motivated. But I wonder, was “our” democratic transition merely ideological? Isn’t it true that our leaders gave in to popular pressure, silencing the people by giving them a voice, and thus keeping us from rioting? Introduction of democracy is instrumental, and not an end in itself, but isn’t it in any country?<br /><br />DO CHINESE VILLAGERS ENJOY FREE ELECTIONS?<br /><br />So whether the Politburo of the CCP is crowded with libertarian ideologists or not, we can safely say that, in comparison with thirty years ago, Chinese people have a greater voice. Two caveats, however: does this greater voice mean a step towards grassroots democracy? Does a louder voice mean that there is greater civilian participation in political matters? The question of how democratic the Chinese village elections are, has been researched extensively over the past two decades. Various studies have composed data on village elections and placed them next to a certain ‘universal standard’ of democratic elections. For instance, aspects of the election process that people in democratic countries find obvious like closed voting booths and anonymous voting were not so obvious in China at first. Also, the degree of openness in the run up to the election is very interesting. International standards say that an election is only really free if there are more candidates for one position. Candidates should have the opportunity to tell the voters what they intend to do with their mandate. Pastor and Tan give a list of key elements of the electoral process that can either signify free or not so free elections<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn17" name="_ftnref17">[17]</a>. The election management in China is often done by a local CCP-official, which obviously is not ideal, seeing that the contesting candidates might very well not be a member of the Party. Registration is important because people can otherwise vote more than once. Selection of candidates is crucial. If the Party selects the candidates, you can safely say there is no democracy. If everyone can become a candidate, then it is much more fair. It is best of the people can nominate whoever they think is suitable. This is called 海选 (haixuan) or a pick from the sea<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn18" name="_ftnref18">[18]</a>. All these requirements have been adopted in the Organic Law for Villagers Committees, but the real question obviously is, whether or not they are being followed up. It seems hard to make any hard conclusions. None of the studies available managed to come up with conclusive data, that supports the claim that on a whole village elections are fair and free. This in part is because the Chinese government doesn’t have comprehensive data on a national scale. Most scholars do however argue that the degree of openness is growing. Shi Tianjian for instance explains how the first elections were treated as a formality by local officials, but as the practice grew, civilians started to appeal to the right they now had, to actually make these elections work. As Shi puts it: “once people had tasted this kind of democracy, local officials would have a hard time taking away the right to vote”<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn19" name="_ftnref19">[19]</a>. And Kevin J. O’Brien puts it this way: “By all accounts, the quality of village elections has improved […], and voter interest is on the rise”<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn20" name="_ftnref20">[20]</a>. My impression from reading the studies is that the elections might have been introduced to curb social unrest, but ironically now, the threat of popular anger is making officials work harder to arrange for fairer and freer elections. I think it is appropriate to say that the village elections in China are free and open enough to make the idea of elections a success in the minds of the Chinese villagers.<br /><br />GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY?<br /><br />So the elections are relatively free, fair and open. After twenty years of experimentation it seems the practice of village level elections has become part of the normal political life. But how democratic is this political life in Chinese villages? Or rather, even if there are free elections, does this mean the society itself is more open? Does this mean there is a incremental institutionalization of real grassroots democracy? Again, these question can only be circumstantially answered. If we take institutionalization as an administrative term, then we can clearly state that the political reform in rural governance has led to a system of villager self-governance. In most cases, the villagers choose their committee members, and the villages are completely self-supporting. The elections have become a inseparable part of this system. More over, in the minds of the Chinese bureaucrats it seems elections became a real trend. At the end of the nineties of the last century, the Chinese leadership began to contemplate township government elections. This next administrative layer, after the village, should be next in the process of incremental democratization<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn21" name="_ftnref21">[21]</a>. Also, the notion that China has never dealt with or thought of democracy as an ideology is a classic mistake. Some communities in China<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn22" name="_ftnref22">[22]</a> have had democratic habits for as long as they can remember. He Shaoying depicts the ‘democratic’ practices of the Lahu-people in Yunnan, South-West China. For centuries they have been choosing their leaders in a fixed election process<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23">[23]</a>.<br /><br />EMPOWERING VILLAGERS<br /><br />In order to see how far democratization has come in China, maybe we should first investigate some other issues. Suppose China does have a certain degree of grassroots democracy. Can the degree of institutionalization of democracy be measured by the attitude the peasants have towards their leaders? Li Lianjiang uses this approach to conceive a notion of political trust in rural China. Li’s findings corroborate with the impressions I have been getting recently, that the villagers trust in the central government is unyielding, in comparison with the trust in local officials<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn24" name="_ftnref24">[24]</a>. This low esteem of local politicians would suggest that villagers do not feel involved. However, Li did not include the Villagers Committee (which is the one body that is actually directly elected) in the questionnaire<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn25" name="_ftnref25">[25]</a>. So from Li’s study we cannot derive any usable data to claim that villagers feel consulted. The approach Li is using does seem to be a good one, though. My supposition would be, that if villagers would express their trust in Villagers Committees, they would implicitly say they felt like they were participating. In an earlier article by Li, published in the Asian Survey, Li explains why this approach is so useful. “… Chinese villagers feel a higher level of political efficacy after their first free and fair election, because they can now remove unresponsive cadres”<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn26" name="_ftnref26">[26]</a>. In other words, people start to feel empowered. On the other hand, Shi Tianjian made stunning case in 2001 for allowing some space for the classic argument about the dynamics of East Asian authoritarianism. It seems that data proves that to a certain extent, Chinese people have a principally higher trust in their government<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn27" name="_ftnref27">[27]</a>.<br /><br />PEOPLE’S POWER<br /><br />Where is this sense of democratic empowerment coming from? The central leadership can offer the scheme of self-governance and elections, but they cannot tell the people to participate in political affairs. The people have to want this, they have to stride for being heard. As Zhou Xiaohong puts it: “… even though village democracy is […] a top-down initiative, […] villager participation itself is voluntary and not compelled”<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn28" name="_ftnref28">[28]</a>. When comparing grassroots democracy in India and China, George Mathew noticed that the movement of direct elections and a true representation of villager’s needs and desires, came about through popular pressure. “…[it] was mainly because the unrelenting pressure of people’s quests for meaningful democracy at the grassroots level [and] demands for people’s involvement…”<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn29" name="_ftnref29">[29]</a>. So we can conclude that real participation, or democracy if you will, is manifested only when the people demand it.<br /><br />THE ECONOMY AND THE DESIRE TO PARTICIPATE<br /><br />There are some theories on the demand for participation. The Social Mobilization Theory claims that economical development and legitimacy form the prerequisite for democracy<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn30" name="_ftnref30">[30]</a>. It was an article by Seymour Martin Lipset in The American Political Science Review in 1959 that China scholars still refer to when they claim that liberal democracy will come to China as long as the market economy continues to liberalize. However, this has long ago been proven an illusion, if not wishful thinking by some western scholars. There is no direct correlation between market economy and democratization. There are, on the other hand, certain ties between the economical situation and the degree of democratization. Research done by Shi Tianjian provides us with data that seems to suggest that the villages in China with a relatively developed economy are less likely to see political development<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn31" name="_ftnref31">[31]</a>. This might be because economic development consolidates the powers of incumbent leaders because, Shi suggests, people become more dependent on the leaders, leaders have more resources to bribe their superiors (to ignore the election results) or leaders have more resources to co-opt peasants. A study by David Zweig and Chung Siu Fung also suggests a negative relation between economic development and the degree of democracy. Their data suggests that richer villages are less democratic. One of the reasons they cited was that wealthy villagers, when asked if they felt more democracy was needed, answered that as long as there was steady economic growth, no reform was necessary<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn32" name="_ftnref32">[32]</a>. So there is no positive relation between economic reform and political reform. We can, however, say that there are indirect relations. For instance, economic development gives people a louder voice. Think of the current demand by civilians in China for better consumer rights, after fifty children died having consumed poisonous milk powder<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn33" name="_ftnref33">[33]</a>. As Shi puts it: “economic development […] significantly influenced the attitudes of […] the political elites […], increased the peasants resources and skills and enhanced their desire to get involved in the decision-making process in their villages”(italics added)<a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftn34" name="_ftnref34">[34]</a>. There is reason to believe that interesting things are going to happen in the coming years in China. The Chinese situation requires us to reconsider all traditional theories on the correlation between economic development and political reform.<br /><br />CONCLUSION<br /><br />So grassroots democracy is gradually manifesting itself in rural China, not just in administrative meaning, but also as an abstract idea in the minds of villagers. My paper tries to show that the efficiency of the Villagers Committees in governing rural affairs is not equivocally clear. The authority of any government body in village affairs depends on various features of the village. The smallest villages do not seem to be in great need of central governance, nor does there seem to be a real necessity for institutionalized sself-governance. The bigger, more industrialized villages on the other hand have a great deal of dependency on their local representation, especially towards the other villages and higher level of government bodies. This is a largely economically motivated interest. Furthermore I have tried to explain why the institutionalization of grassroots democracy is very visible, however incremental it might be. As an administrative notion, villager’s self-governance seems to be deeply rooted by now. The creeping democratization in rural China is not self-evident. Not enough research has been done to supply scholars with data that might confirm an increased feeling of trust towards governing bodies. However, I would like to state some thoughts. The fact that more and more people are becoming economically empowered, suggests an societal empowerment that in my opinion is already visible. The recent developments in web-culture, from the incredibly popular bulletin boards to the blogosphere in general, make it clear to me that Chinese all over the country are becoming more voiced on social issues. Whether this has significant consequences for the political reform has yet to be seen. But one thing is clear. No matter what top-down initiatives might arise in Chinese politics, real manifestation of grassroots democracy will have to come from the people themselves.<br />November 12th, 2008 Thomas de Groot, Amsterdam<br /><br /><br /><br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a> He Shaoying, “The Evolution and Function of the Kaxie System of the Lahu People in South-west China”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, M. Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007), 396<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">[2]</a> Minxin Pei, “Contradictory Trends and Confusing Signals”, Journal of Democracy 14:1 (January 2003);<br />Andrew J. Nathan, “Authoritarian Resilience”, Journal of Democracy 14:1 (January 2003).<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">[3]</a> R. Keith Schoppa, The Columbia Guide to Modern Chinese History (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 129<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4">[4]</a> The land still technically belonged to the state, so the farmers didn’t have the right to randomly sell it. In October 2008 the government finally liberalized the individual land ownership:<br /><br />Xinhua News, “在新的起点上推进农村改革发展一一党的十七届三中全会传递的政策信号”<br /><a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-10/12/content_10184361.htm">http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-10/12/content_10184361.htm</a> (chinese) (visited 08-11-2008)<br /><br />Xinhua News, “CCP Closes Major Meeting with Decision on Rural Reform, Development”<br /><a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-10/12/content_10183313.htm">http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-10/12/content_10183313.htm</a> (english) (visited 08-11-2008)<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5">[5]</a> Guan Juanjuan, Explaining Rural Democracy in China (Leiden: Master thesis Public Administration, 2005), 20.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6">[6]</a> Kevin J. O’Brien and Li Lianjiang, “Accommodating “Democracy” in a One-Party State: Introducing Village Elections in China”, The China Quarterly (2000): 467.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7">[7]</a>Jean C. Oi and Scott Rozelle, “Elections and Power: The Locus of Decision-Making in Chinese Villages”, The China Quarterly 162 (June 2000): 515.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref8" name="_ftn8">[8]</a> Ibid. p. 524<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref9" name="_ftn9">[9]</a> George Mathew, “Local Government System in India and China: Learning from Each Other”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, M. Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007), 36.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref10" name="_ftn10">[10]</a> Ma Rong, “Changes in Local Administration and their Impact on Community Life in the Grasslands of Inner Mongolia”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007), 149.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref11" name="_ftn11">[11]</a> Yang Shenming, “The Environment, the Family and Local Government among the Tajik People”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007), 36.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref12" name="_ftn12">[12]</a> Oi and Rozelle, p. 532<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref13" name="_ftn13">[13]</a> Michel Oksenberg, “China’s Political System: Challenges of the Twenty-First Century”, The China Journal 45 (January 2001): 22.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref14" name="_ftn14">[14]</a> Ray Yep, Maintaining Stability in Rural China: Challenges and Responses (Center for Northeastern Asian Policy Studies, The Brookings Institution, 2002), 15.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref15" name="_ftn15">[15]</a> Ibid, p. 8.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref16" name="_ftn16">[16]</a> Robert A. Pastor and Tan Qingshan, “The Meaning of China’s Village Elections”, The China Quarterly 162 (June 2000): 512<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref17" name="_ftn17">[17]</a> Ibid. p. 493<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref18" name="_ftn18">[18]</a> Later on this term became very significant in Chinese pop-culture, thanks to the immensely popular tv-show Supergirl (超女 chaonü). The term was used consequently to mean that everyone could decide to participate in this show, and even more interesting, in the second year of the show, everyone in China could vote by text-message on their preferred singer. So 海选 (haixuan ) is a word that everyone associates with democracy and participation of some sort. <a href="http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzYwOTg1MzY=.html">http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzYwOTg1MzY=.html</a><br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref19" name="_ftn19">[19]</a> Shi Tianjian, “Rural Democracy in China”, East Asian Institute Contemporary China Series 24 (2000): 16.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref20" name="_ftn20">[20]</a> Kevin J. O’Brien, “Villagers, elections and Citizenship in Contemporary China”, Modern China 27:4 (October 2001): 418.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref21" name="_ftn21">[21]</a> Tony Saich and Yang Xuedong, “Selecting Within the Rules: Institutional Innovation in China’s Governance”, ”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007), 93.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref22" name="_ftn22">[22]</a> Note that “China” is just a geographical entity, and not an ethnic or cultural one.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref23" name="_ftn23">[23]</a> He Shaoying, “The Evolution and Function of the Kaxie System of the Lahu People in South-west China”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, M. Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007), 401.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref24" name="_ftn24">[24]</a> Li Lianjiang, “Political Trust in Rural China”, Modern China 30:2 (April 2004): 229<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref25" name="_ftn25">[25]</a> Ibid; p. 254<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref26" name="_ftn26">[26]</a> Li Lianjiang, “The Empowering Effect of Village Elections in China”, Asian Survey 63:4 (July/August 2003):648.<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref27" name="_ftn27">[27]</a> Shi Tianjian, “Cultural Values and Political Trust: A Comparison of the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan”, Comparative Politics 33:4 (June 2001): 415<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref28" name="_ftn28">[28]</a> Zhou Xiaohong, “Rural Political Participation in the Maoist and Post-Mao Periods”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007) p. 88<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref29" name="_ftn29">[29]</a>George Mathew, “Local Government System in India and China: Learning from Each Other”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007) p. 37<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref30" name="_ftn30">[30]</a> Seymour Martin Lipset, “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy”, The American Political Science Review 53:1 (March 1959): p. 71<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref31" name="_ftn31">[31]</a> Shi Tianjian, “Rural Democracy in China”, East Asian Institute Contemporary China Series 24 (2000): p. 51<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref32" name="_ftn32">[32]</a> David Zweig and Chung Siu Fung, “Democracy, Good Governance and Economic Development in Rural China”, in Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007) p. 346<br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref33" name="_ftn33">[33]</a> For a humorous approach, take a look at these images from angry netizens: <a href="http://www.chinasmack.com/pictures/kidney-stone-gate-netizens-make-use-sanlu-photoshops/">http://www.chinasmack.com/pictures/kidney-stone-gate-netizens-make-use-sanlu-photoshops/</a><br /><a title="" style="" href="http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=84082734167719821#_ftnref34" name="_ftn34">[34]</a> Shi Tianjian, “Rural Democracy in China”, East Asian Institute Contemporary China Series 24 (2000): p. 50<br />REFERENCES<br /><br /><br />* Guan Juanjuan, Explaining Rural Democracy in China (Leiden: Master thesis Public Administration, 2005).<br /><br />* Li Lianjiang, “The Empowering Effect of Village Elections in China”, Asian Survey 63:4 (July/August 2003): p. 648-662<br /><br />* Li Lianjiang, “Political Trust in Rural China”, Modern China 30:2 (April 2004): p. 228-258<br /><br />* Seymour Martin Lipset, “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy”, The American Political Science Review 53:1 (March 1959): p. 69-105.<br /><br />* Grass-roots Democracy in India and China: The Right to Participate, ed. M. Mohanty, R. Baum, Ma Rong and G. Mathew (New Dehli: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd, 2007)<br /># David Zweig and Chung Siu Fung, “Democracy, Good Governance and Economic Development in Rural China” p. 339-362<br /># Mathew, “Local Government System in India and China: Learning from Each Other” p. 33-52<br /># Zhou Xiaohong, “Rural Political Participation in the Maoist and Post-Mao Periods” p. 73-92<br /># He Shaoying, “The Evolution and Function of the Kaxie System of the Lahu People in South-west China” p. 391-408<br /># Tony Saich and Yang Xuedong, “Selecting Within the Rules: Institutional Innovation in China’s Governance” p. 93-122<br /># Yang Shenming, “The Environment, the Family and Local Government among the Tajik People” p. 379-390<br /># Ma Rong, “Changes in Local Administration and their Impact on Community Life in the Grasslands of Inner Mongolia”, p. 141-160.<br /><br />* Andrew J. Nathan, “Authoritarian Resilience”, Journal of Democracy 14:1 (January 2003): p. 5-17.<br /><br />* Kevin J. O’Brien and Li Lianjiang, “Accommodating “Democracy” in a One-Party State: Introducing Village Elections in China”, The China Quarterly (2000): p. 465-489.<br /><br />* Kevin J. O’Brien, “Villagers, elections and Citizenship in Contemporary China”, Modern China 27:4 (October 2001): p. 407-435.<br /><br />* Jean C. Oi and Scott Rozelle, “Elections and Power: The Locus of Decision-Making in Chinese Villages”, The China Quarterly 162 (June 2000): p. 513-539.<br /><br />* Michel Oksenberg, “China’s Political System: Challenges of the Twenty-First Century”, The China Journal 45 (January 2001): p. 21-35.<br /><br />* Robert A. Pastor and Tan Qingshan, “The Meaning of China’s Village Elections”, The China Quarterly 162 (June 2000): p. 490-512.<br /><br />* Minxin Pei, “Contradictory Trends and Confusing Signals”, Journal of Democracy 14:1 (January 2003)<br /><br />* R. Keith Schoppa, The Columbia Guide to Modern Chinese History (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 129.<br /><br />* Shi Tianjian, “Rural Democracy in China”, East Asian Institute Contemporary China Series 24 (2000).<br /><br />* Shi Tianjian, “Cultural Values and Political Trust: A Comparison of the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan”, Comparative Politics 33:4 (June 2001): p. 401-419.<br /><br />* Ray Yep, Maintaining Stability in Rural China: Challenges and Responses (Center for Northeastern Asian Policy Studies, The Brookings Institution, 2002)<br /><br />* Chinasmack<br /><a href="http://www.chinasmack.com/pictures/kidney-stone-gate-netizens-make-use-sanlu-photoshops/">http://www.chinasmack.com/pictures/kidney-stone-gate-netizens-make-use-sanlu-photoshops/</a> (visited 08-11-2008)<br /><br />* Youku<br /><a href="http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzYwOTg1MzY=.html">http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzYwOTg1MzY=.html</a> (visited 08-11-2008)<br /><br />* Xinhua News, “在新的起点上推进农村改革发展一一党的十七届三中全会传递的政策信号”<br /><a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-10/12/content_10184361.htm">http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-10/12/content_10184361.htm</a> (chinese) (visited 08-11-2008)<br /><br />* Xinhua News, “CCP Closes Major Meeting with Decision on Rural Reform, Development”<br /><a href="http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-10/12/content_10183313.htm">http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-10/12/content_10183313.htm</a> (english) (visited 08-11-2008)</p><br /></span>Thomas de Groothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08869588218160539862noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-84082734167719821.post-7290754073575816102008-11-12T20:15:00.005+01:002008-11-13T23:35:45.364+01:00Team China vs. the WorldI realise how critical I can be about China. I recognise this critical attitude in the western media too. The western attitude has a big influence on the way people here look at foreigners, and consequently it influences the way Chinese see their own country. Chinese nationalism is reaching its climax this summer. Moreover, the Olympic Games are also recreating Chinese reality.<br /><span class="fullpost"><br /><br />******************************************************************<br /><br />Part 1<br /><br /><br />The Critical Outsider<br /><br /><br />Why do I tend to criticise China? When I walk on Tiananmen Square, I always think about how many secret police officers there could be watching me, or how fast they could arrest me if I started shouting. Why do I love to take a Chinese newspaper and read it to my friends, saying how awful this propaganda machine is. Why do I feel uncomfortable when I see the commercials for the Olympics? Why do I speak about indoctrination, human rights and the lack of freedom every night at dinner? Worst of all, it’s not just me. It can be said about numerous western media too.<br /><br /><br />Western Media<br /><br /><br />The focus has been on China lately. Living here, I feel that the eyes of the world are turning towards this years climax in China’s capital. Browse through the newspapers and influential websites and you will see two things: people read and write about China, and they do it in a certain manner. The fact that institutions such as the New York Times, CNN or BBC are biased is common knowledge. It has been said before. Of course they are. The journalists from the BBC, whom I respect like a Chinese student respects his teacher, are human beings just like the rest of us. So naturally there will be a certain tendency to deviate from the objective reportage that is supposed to be the ethical standard. But still, when the Chinese government laments that the western media is against them, they have got a point. To see how biased the big western media are, you just have to look at the ten most recent articles and news items on China. They are all about human rights, thuggish security methods and absolutist rule. Why does America have an “administration”, and China a “regime”? What is the consequence of this western attitude?<br /><br /><br />Nationalism Revived<br /><br /><br />China has been suffering from a chronic minority complex for centuries. After the humiliation by their neighbors during the last days of the Empire, the Japanese invasion, a civil war and three decades of Maoist isolation, China has finally risen to the level of international relevance it deserves. What the Chinese people seem to be craving more than anything else, is respect. The Games in Beijing are not just a cry for attention from a developing country, they are the climax of a explosive rise to global hegemony, that allows the Chinese people to tell the world that they matter. What the Communist Party is giving the people this year is a reason to be proud of their country. To be a patriot, to love your country, is the latest big thing in China. It seems that everyone loves to be Chinese. And you can sense this nationalism throughout all the layers of the population. This wave of nationalism has been slowly developing for a while now, but recently it seems to be getting more and more extreme. It includes anti-Japanese sentiments, aggression to foreigners who work here and a fierce hostility to foreign media.<br /><br /><br />Chinese Counter-reaction<br /><br /><br />When the Chinese army troops marched into Tibet last month, two things happened at the same time. Western media lined up to condemn the government for their “crackdown on protests for freedom”, and Chinese media lined up to condemn western media for their biased coverage. The result of all this, apart from the bloodshed that we will never really be able to investigate, was that the people in the west felt assured in their opinion on the Chinese “regime”, and that the people in China felt harmed by the outside world. Again. We as foreign students in China spoke about the violation of human rights, desperately looking for recognition of our disapproval from the Chinese people around us. But almost all of us were disappointed, again, because our anger was not only not affirmed by the people here, but we were even met by anger from them, towards us.<br /><br /><br />Hostility Towards Foreigners<br /><br /><br />This anger is mostly hidden under the surface. But it is still there. They sense that our opinion on the actions of the Chinese government is different from theirs. They sense that we do not approve of some of the policies of the Party. Even if they don’t read the foreign media. When a foreign student was arrested last month for allegedly kicking a woman in a public bus in Beijing, the web logs discussing the news tumbled over each other to mention this incident, citing the state-run Xinhua news agency: “Foreign student kicks sixty year old Chinese woman out of the bus”. When the students were released from the police station, a complete assembly of Chinese reporters was waiting to photograph them, blocking their way and forcing them to cover themselves with their coats. Many people believe the west is conspiring with the Dalai Lama to overthrow the Chinese government. The websites claiming a foreign conspiracy to demonize China are numerous, and even though the government is involved in a lot of them, the general opinion of the Chinese people is still visible. www.anti-cnn.com is clearly sponsored by the Party, but the feelings expressed still seem to represent a genuine hostility towards western arrogance. You can sense the atmosphere in Beijing getting more hostile towards foreigners. This is where this summer’s Games fit in.<br /><br /><br />Olympic Pride<br /><br /><br />The Olympic Games serve as a platform from which the Communist Party can jump to greater heights. Everyone here is extremely proud of this event, and most people thank the Party for the success the Games will undoubtedly be. The Games “give face” to the nation. Ask the people here what the biggest progress is China has made in the past few decades, and they will all say the outside world finally respects them. Not wealth, development or any other form of material progress, but respect. They look at the newly built skyscrapers and know they will never enter such a building. They see that the cars on the streets in Beijing are becoming more luxurious every day, while they are still driving the three wheel bicycle. They hear the government saying, on one of the numerous CCTV-channels, that the average Chinese family lives in a three bedroom apartment, but when they look around them they know: that might be true, but not for us. There is only one thing that really gets to them, when they think about all the changes that China is going through. Pride. Because when those Games finally begin, the whole world will watch, and look on in awe at what China has achieved. Who else to thank for this than the Party?<br />***************************************************************************<br /><br />Part 2<br /><br /><br />A constant frustration in my conversations with Chinese people is my failure to communicate with them what I feel is life in China. In this country, we are living under the rule of a “regime” with a violent history. Even though it is relatively quiet nowadays, once in a while horrible things happen to the people. You can sense a tense atmosphere, always and everywhere. But they don’t seem to care as much. They just shrug their shoulders and go on with their life. Why do the Olympics play such an important part in this Chinese reality?<br /><br /><br />Asking the Impossible<br /><br /><br />Anyone who has ever asked a Chinese friend about the events on Tiananmen-Square in 1989, knows what I mean. When I ask them if they know what happened those days in June, they will nod, while the look in their eyes turns vague, distant. They might say how awful it is that people died. They might tell you that they have never heard any such thing. They might get angry, saying that we foreigners are always looking for something to criticise. But what they will not in any case say is how criminal the actions of the government were. Not because they are afraid, or brainwashed, that’s too easy. But think about it. Those foreigners come here, thinking they know what is best for the Chinese people. They go around shouting terms like ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’, thinking the Chinese will just get up and start throwing stones at the nearest government building. What we are asking them, is to deny their identity. Of course they know that the Party at times crosses the line. They live here, remember? They know exactly what is going on. But what are they supposed to do? Condemn the Party like the BBC does? It is their country we are speaking about, not some study object.<br /><br /><br />Living in a Communist State<br /><br /><br />If you expect them to criticise their government, you ask them to deny everything they hear, everything they see and everything they were taught. Because the Party, the system, the government, and even the country is all the same thing. Your teacher is a member of the Communist Party. Your housing is supplied to you by the Party. The government speaks to you in the subway, on the highway. They communicate to you through red banners on the buildings you buy your groceries in. They write your newspaper and they choose which television shows you watch. They tell you which movie is worth seeing. ‘They’ are everywhere, because ‘they’ constitute the people. There is no such thing as independent cinema in China. Or independent supermarkets. Not even Google is independent. Consequently, Chinese Capitalism is Communist Capitalism. Finally, thought is not free. Nor independent. If your government tells you that the army is being mobilised in Tibet to protect the country, you tend to believe them. When the western media tell you the army is there to violate human rights, you look to your government for an explanation. When the Party (or the television or the bloggers on-line) answer that the foreign reporters are only trying to destroy China, you will accept what they say. And gratefully so, because no one wants to doubt their own people. I point to the mass support amongst the people in the United States for the war in Iraq. It took five years for the majority to start asking questions. How long will it take them to question what really happened on 9/11 in New York? The Chinese people don’t have many choices in their lives. They have to live here, they have to justify to themselves every step they take in this country. They have to justify their existence. And they have to survive. Which, for most Chinese people, is still a sizeable task.<br /><br /><br />The Pride Paradox<br /><br /><br />Moreover, when China was chosen to host the Olympics a new chapter in the development of Chinese nationalism began. Criticising China, the government or the system, means something much worse than being a critical citizen. It means bashing the Olympics. The Games might be a ceremony for the Party, but they also belong to the people. The Bird’s Nest wasn’t built by CCP-cadres. It was built by those people that will be expelled from Beijing next month. The workers who come from poor places like Gansu province to work in construction. The people that the government will try to hide by any means. The people. And general opinion here is, that however wrong the system is, these Olympics are an opportunity for the people. It is authentic pride they will feel when the Games begin. It is their every right to be pride of something as massive as the Olympics. Because it is the biggest sporting event in the world, and the Chinese athletes will participate in every field, in their own stadiums. “We built that”, the people will say when then see the matches on television. It is an honour.<br />China is putting itself in the limelight, and everyone knows what that means. There will be criticism. It can either go very well or terribly wrong. This puts the people on the spot as well. They will see themselves confronted with a choice. Not to cheer for Team China, is equal to criticising the Party. Are you in or are you out? Do you support China, will you cheer for Team China? Will you approve of the actions of this government? The choice is easy. It is like asking them if they want to survive.<br /><br /><br />***************************************************************************<br /><br /><br />I started this article asking myself why it is so tempting for me to criticize this country. One of the reasons might be that I am, and always will be, an outsider. I will always be the foreigner, no matter how fluent in Chinese I may become. The Chinese society is very closed to foreigners. Another very important reason for wanting to criticise China is the fact that I study Sinology. Many people have come here for a week and think that they understand everything. Some resident correspondents don’t even speak Mandarin. I feel that I should be able to say more about China than most people, because I spent the last three years studying everything about it. I live here. Somehow this makes me feel in the position to criticise the country. It is like criticising your best friends. But lately I find it more difficult to criticise China. Because it is getting harder and harder to see China as my best friend.<br /><br /><br /><br />April 23rd 2008<br /><br />Thomas de Groot, Beijing, PRC<br /></span>Thomas de Groothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08869588218160539862noreply@blogger.com0