China Studies

Re: China Studies

Postby taiwan » Tue Jan 03, 2012 1:36 pm

bob wrote:While we should uphold our values (such as human rights, etc.) to maintain our own spirits and moral high ground, we also must consider Tienzen's points above on any practical strategy.




david wrote:
Tienzen wrote:... For example, are Chinese people moved by our action of awarding a “Somebody” a Nobel [Peace] Prize?
What did we (the America) gain from this?
Did we move more Chinese people to our side?
Or, we just helped Chinese government with our action?
What kind of action from us can move Chinese people, especially to our side?


The questions asked by Tienzen in his first post of this thread can be the best practical questions for our consideration.



I am a Taiwanese growing up by singing anti-communist songs. My dislike the Chinese communist regime goes way beyond her human records.

I do think that Tienzen’s question on the effects of awarding Liu Xiaobo (劉 曉 波) the Nobel Peace Prize is a truly a key question for the China studies. Do we advance our aim of moving Chinese people to our ideas of human right and democracy?

I have talked to many Chinese friends and not a single person giving a damn about Liu. Of course, this personal survey is not done statistically, but it is still a good indication.

Did this act impress me? If Liu has done a great work, I will be impressed. I did not know about him at all before 2008. I heard about that he and many other wrote a Charter 08 in the news but without knowing what that Charter was all about, then the news about his arrest by Chinese government and finally his winning the Nobel Peace Prize. That is, Liu was a nobody to me as my contemporary. So, I went to the Nobel Peace Prize website to read about him.

It says that Liu is a great writer with many great books written. I did not read any of his book and thus cannot comment on them. But, I do read his Nobel Prize statement “I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement” in Chinese (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... ure_ch.pdf ). His Chinese language skill is quite poor in that statement. I will just show one example here.

Liu’s sentence (我 被 從 監 視 居 住 處 轉 到 北 京 市 公 安 局 第 一 看 守 所,)

The following three sentences are the better and the correct ways for Chinese sentences.
1. 從 監 視 居 住 處, 我 被 轉 到 北 京 市 公 安 局 第 一 看 守 所.
2. 我 從 監 視 居 住 處, 被 轉 到 北 京 市 公 安 局 第 一 看 守 所.
3. 我 被 從 監 視 居 住 處, 轉 到 北 京 市 公 安 局 第 一 看 守 所.

At the Nobel website, info about Liu is available at the following pages,
Biography (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... iaobo.html )

I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... cture.html )

The “Documentary” is a video (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... -docu.html ). One Chinese lady in the video did upset me by saying “kill the monkey to scare the chicken, 殺 猴 儆 雞” to describe the treatment of Liu by the Chinese government. There was no such idiom in China. The correct idiom is “kill the chicken to scare the monkey, 殺 雞 儆 猴”. While the language is alive and free, she must respect the usage of idiom. Of course, she can create a new phrase “kill the monkey to scare the chicken, 殺 猴 儆 雞” for her own creativity but must not claim it to be an idiom.

While not knowing the detail of dispute between Liu and Chinese government, I found that Liu is a Nobody as a literary man. As Chinese is a sage culture, someone like Liu will not gain much respect from the Chinese commoners.
taiwan
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:45 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby Tienzen » Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:05 pm

taiwan wrote:It says that Liu is a great writer with many great books written. I did not read any of his book and thus cannot comment on them. But, I do read his Nobel Prize statement “I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement” in Chinese (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... ure_ch.pdf ). His Chinese language skill is quite poor in that statement. I will just show one example here. ...


Thanks for the pdf-link. I am quite surprised for the poor language skill of that article. It obviously will not move too many Chinese people. Seemingly, Liu grew up during the Culture Revolution (CR) period and was deprived the chance for setting a firm Chinese language skill foundation as the entire education system was shut down for 10 long years. Furthermore, the Nobel committee was not a Chinese language expert. Thus, Liu’s poor language skill should not be a problem for his other achievements. The question here is that whether Liu had any outstanding achievements beyond the reach of any other Chinese people.

The same as you, I did not ever hear about Liu until 2008. After reading all material available on the Nobel website, I learned that Liu began his anti-Chinese government career from the June 4th event of 1989. Thus, to understand the June 4th event will be the key to judge Liu’s career.

Since the Opium wars of 1840s, China had suffered continuous defeats and humiliations. By 1899, the Capitol Bejing was occupied by the Eight Allied Nations. During these 60 long years, the shame of Chinese “people” had become an angry torrent which gave the birth to Sun Yat-sen’s Republic of China in 1911. This same torrent gave rise to the May 4th movement in 1919 which again gave the life to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This same turbulent current led the CCP taking over China in 1949. For the past 150 years, the soul of Chinese people has only two wishes, 1) cleanse this 100 year shame, 2) regain the greatness of China as a “center” Kingdom again. That is, any suffering, however great, will be endured before the fulfillment of these two soul-wishes. So, the oppressiveness or the human right violation from the government will be and must be tolerated for the sake of these soul-wishes. Thus, Liu’s act will gain no sympathy from the majority of Chinese commoners. Liu will even be viewed as a selfish traitor on these two great soul-causes.

Even today, the above-said torrent is still the main current in the hearts of the Chinese people. And, the CCP is viewed as the greatest Captain who leads Chinese people to move ahead in this turbulent current. That is, CCP is, in fact, the “soul” savior of Chinese people at this moment. With this understanding, the June 4th of 1989 was not a movement with any solid foundation, as it was only a small whirlpool of this same torrent, perhaps a mutated one which gained no lasting support inside of China while many people outside of China took it as a great opportunity for smearing the CCP. If Liu’s act was truly great, it was done at a wrong place and at a wrong time as no Chinese commoner will appreciate it.

This situation will not be changed before these two soul-wishes of Chinese people are fulfilled.
Tienzen
Founder
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: USA

Re: China Studies

Postby optimax » Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:46 pm

Any human right violation by any government is not acceptable under any circumstance. However, if Tienzen’s analysis of the mentality of Chinese people is correct, then any Sinologist who knows not this analysis will be no ability to make correct China studies.

But, it is still very hard for me to comprehend that Chinese government can be truly invincible without a true democracy.
optimax
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:33 am

Re: China Studies

Postby papabear » Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:44 am

optimax wrote:But, it is still very hard for me to comprehend that Chinese government can be truly invincible without a true democracy.


No political power in history is invincible forever. Every Chinese dynasty lasted about two to three hundred years, but the Chinese nation has survived over 5,000 years.

In the past 60 years, Chinese people have suffered greatly a few times under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Many people perished during the three years of the Great Leap movement. Millions suffered during the 10 long years of Culture Revolution. However, those mistakes and sufferings are now history and will not become a long lasting problem for CCP. However tragic that the June 4th of 1989 event it was, it was a one day event and followed by twenty years prosperity. Obviously, this long term prosperity has swept that tragedy under the rug for the majority of Chinese commoners.

I do agree with Tienzen’s analysis of Chinese people’s mentality in the current situation. Thus, CCP will be invincible as a ruling power in China for foreseeable future, at least 30 to 50 more years.
papabear
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 7:38 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby hantze » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:43 pm

papabear wrote:I do agree with Tienzen’s analysis of Chinese people’s mentality in the current situation. Thus, CCP will be invincible as a ruling power in China for foreseeable future, at least 30 to 50 more years.


I agree with this analysis too.

While most of CCP’s mistakes are now history or swept under the rug by the current prosperity, one blunder of CCP will have a long lasting negative effect.

Before the discovery of this new Chinese etymology, the Chinese written language was viewed as the culprit for China’s humiliation for the past 150 years. And, CCP’s effort of launching the simplified system was viewed as the greatest political achievement. Now, with the discovery of this new Chinese etymology, this greatest political achievement will become the biggest mistake. The CCP’s great credential will be deeply harmed when most of Chinese commoners find out this fact. This issue will be the biggest vulnerability for CCP for years to come.
hantze
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 12:49 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby taiwan » Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:08 pm

hantze wrote:... The CCP’s great credential will be deeply harmed when most of Chinese commoners find out this fact. This issue will be the biggest vulnerability for CCP for years to come.


China is trying to weasel out from this vulnerability by a plan of returning to the traditional characters in 10 years. Please see the news clip (August 2010) below. Right click the image to view the entire clip.


Image
taiwan
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:45 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby optimax » Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:30 pm

hantze wrote:The CCP’s great credential will be deeply harmed when most of Chinese commoners find out this fact. This issue will be the biggest vulnerability for CCP for years to come.



Very interesting. But, I do not think that Western Sinologists and politicians have the knowledge and the ability to articulate this CCP’s vulnerability. However, it will be funny if Chinese philologists must come to America to learn Chinese etymology.
optimax
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:33 am

Re: China Studies

Postby votusa » Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:57 pm

optimax wrote:... , it will be funny if Chinese philologists must come to America to learn Chinese etymology.



If this happens, America has a true chance to move Chinese people for accepting the Western value, especially about the human rights.

But, there is little chance for this to happen. America is now a debtor nation, and Chinese government gives millions and millions to American universities when they establish a “Confucius Institute” (see http://college.chinese.cn/en/?gclid=CPP ... QgoddTY3Ag ) in their campuses. Stanford University received four million dollars for setting up a Confucius Institute in her campus. Now, over 70 American universities host a Confucius Institute in their campuses.

With a Confucius Institute in its campus, its Chinese language department will definitely not teach any program which is different from the curriculum of Confucius Institute.
votusa
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:00 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby mariaC » Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:14 pm

taiwan wrote:It says that Liu is a great writer with many great books written. I did not read any of his book and thus cannot comment on them. But, I do read his Nobel Prize statement “I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement” in Chinese (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/ ... ure_ch.pdf ). ...



Thanks for the link.

Liu’s sentence style is a bit awkward in comparison to the style in Taiwan. But, I think it is caused by the different styles between Taiwan and mainland China. Of course, his language skill is not reaching the classic level but is fair on the commoner’s level. If you judge his skill with the standard of classic writings, it is a bit too harsh on him.
mariaC
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby American » Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:07 pm

optimax wrote:
hantze wrote:The CCP’s great credential will be deeply harmed when most of Chinese commoners find out this fact. This issue will be the biggest vulnerability for CCP for years to come.



Very interesting. But, I do not think that Western Sinologists and politicians have the knowledge and the ability to articulate this CCP’s vulnerability. However, it will be funny if Chinese philologists must come to America to learn Chinese etymology.


Indeed, this is the biggest CCP vulnerability, but America will be unable to take an advantage on it as the American universities have no courage to admit their ignorance on this new Chinese etymology. The discussion of “Is it wrong to the young students? (誤 人 子 弟)!” (at general-discussion/is-it-wrong-to-the-young-students-t36-20.html ) has proved this point. Thus, there is no reason to continue this particular CCP vulnerability discussion.

On the other hand, the issue of undervalue RMB (renminbi) is a major problem for American’s economy now, and both the Congress and the Whitehouse are pushing China to appreciate its RMB. Will this be another vulnerable spot for the CCP? What do you all think about this issue?
American
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:32 am

Re: China Studies

Postby mariaC » Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:29 pm

American wrote:On the other hand, the issue of undervalue RMB (renminbi) is a major problem for American’s economy now, and both the Congress and the Whitehouse are pushing China to appreciate its RMB. Will this be another vulnerable spot for the CCP? What do you all think about this issue?


There is another issue might be important for this China studies, China’s dispute with other nations in the South China Sea.
mariaC
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby kenny » Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:12 pm

mariaC wrote:There is another issue might be important for this China studies, China’s dispute with other nations in the South China Sea.



China is building a blue water navy, especially with a newly launched aircraft carrier [ex-Varyag (瓦 良 格)]. What is China’s intention for a blue water navy?

The following is the photo of Varyag.
Image



Details are available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_ai ... _programme
kenny
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby david » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:06 am

mariaC wrote:
American wrote:On the other hand, the issue of undervalue RMB (renminbi) is a major problem for American’s economy now, and both the Congress and the Whitehouse are pushing China to appreciate its RMB. Will this be another vulnerable spot for the CCP? What do you all think about this issue?


There is another issue might be important for this China studies, China’s dispute with other nations in the South China Sea.



I just read Tienzen's article "A new Economics Theory", which is available at http://www.chinese-word-roots.org/econom01.htm

This article very much answers this RMB issue.
david
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:56 am

Re: China Studies

Postby optimax » Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:01 am

kenny wrote:
China is building a blue water navy, especially with a newly launched aircraft carrier [ex-Varyag (瓦 良 格)]. What is China’s intention for a blue water navy?



Tienzen has written a few articles about China studies, and they are available at http://www.chinese-word-roots.org/cw6.htm

After reading those articles, you can figure out the above question yourself.
optimax
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:33 am

Re: China Studies

Postby optimax » Fri May 25, 2012 1:53 pm

optimax wrote:
hantze wrote:The CCP’s great credential will be deeply harmed when most of Chinese commoners find out this fact. This issue will be the biggest vulnerability for CCP for years to come.
taiwan wrote:China is trying to weasel out from this vulnerability by a plan of returning to the traditional characters in 10 years. Please see the news clip (August 2010) below. Right click the image to view the entire clip.



Very interesting. But, I do not think that Western Sinologists and politicians have the knowledge and the ability to articulate this CCP’s vulnerability. However, it will be funny if Chinese philologists must come to America to learn Chinese etymology.


In the article “State Department Directive Could Disrupt Teaching Activities of Campus-Based Confucius Institutes, http://chronicle.com/article/State-Depa ... ve/131934/ “, it wrote,

“A policy directive sent by the U.S. Department of State to universities … , states that any academics at university-based institutes who are teaching at the elementary- and secondary-school levels are violating the terms of their visas and must leave at the end of this academic year, in June. And it says that, after a "preliminary review," the State Department has determined that the institutes must obtain American accreditation in order to continue to accept foreign scholars and professors as teachers.”

A State Department officer said that this directive is “Simply a Regulatory Matter”. What is every one’s take on this?

The actual directive “Guidance Directive 2012-06 (May 17, 2012)” is available at http://chronicle.com/items/biz/pdf/Guid ... itutes.pdf
optimax
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:33 am

Re: China Studies

Postby American » Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:19 pm

Japan has announced that the government will purchase the 釣魚臺 (Diaoyu Islands) this September (2012). What will China react to this Japan’s move?

釣魚臺 (Diaoyu Islands, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands)

Image
American
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:32 am

Re: China Studies

Postby Tienzen » Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:52 pm

American wrote:Japan has announced that the government will purchase the 釣魚臺 (Diaoyu Islands) this September (2012). What will China react to this Japan’s move?


In the next 20 years, China will not initiate any military action for any islands dispute. If Japan makes a unilateral move to nationalize the Diaoyu Islands, China will simply dodge the issue by changing the subject, rising the stake to a bigger issue of the Ryukyu Islands which was a China’s vassal Kingdom for centuries.

If the military means is the only way to resolve the Diaoyu Islands issue, the military action from China will not deal with only that small issue but will resolve the Ryukyu Islands issue. China will take military action when the American intervention is no longer a concern. When will this time arrive? When China has 3 to 5 combat ready aircraft carriers, and it is about 20 years from now.
Tienzen
Founder
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: USA

Re: China Studies

Postby papabear » Tue Apr 30, 2013 1:12 pm

Someone said, “… Chinese policymakers do not understand the difference between Washington’s neutral stance on the islands’ sovereignty [Diaoyu Islands] and its alliance commitments to Japan, making direct interventions by Washington appear biased.

First, it should make clear to China that attempts to alter the status quo in the waters near the islands will have no bearing on the U.S. commitment to defend Japan.

Washington should remind Japan that U.S. support is not a carte blanche for provocative behavior.”


There are not many issues which cannot be understood, but many of them are not accepted. Yet, there is one issue often misunderstood, that is, the will-power of a nation. Will China give a damn about America’s smart position, neutral but taking a side? My take is not. When North Korea is choked, she will commit suicide as long as she can get enough America lives as cushions for her coffin. If America plays that smart strategy by fighting against China in this island dispute, the war will not be ended until America is driven out of that region. This is my prediction. This is the true China study.
papabear
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 7:38 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby Tienzen » Thu May 02, 2013 9:56 am

papabear wrote: ... fighting against China in this island dispute, the war will not be ended until America is driven out of that region. This is my prediction. This is the true China study.


Will China drive out America from Japan? This issue should be viewed in two levels.

1. It depends on what America is doing in Japan.
a. If America is putting Japan’s fascism under a tight leash, America will be welcomed to stay in Japan by China.

b. If America is a gladiator of (or for) Japan, China will try to drive America out.


2. Does China has the ability to drive America out? The answer is definitely a big Yes. American’s generals simply do not know how to calculate the odds on China’s military power. In history, America has “never” won against China in any military contest while America’s military strength was 100 times stronger than China in those days. Today, the super long sling of American power will be crashed in no time by the concentrated massive land-based Chinese force. All those super stealth bombers are absolutely useless for a country’s size as big as China. As soon as they fire a shot, all their escape routes will be swamped by hundreds fighters.


The bottom line is that China will definitely finish up the Japan’s fascism one way or the other. Absolutely, no bet is needed for this one. Whatever price needs to pay will be paid.
Tienzen
Founder
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: USA

Re: China Studies

Postby American » Thu May 02, 2013 7:17 pm

Tienzen wrote:... American’s generals simply do not know how to calculate the odds on China’s military power. ... Today, the super long sling of American power will be crashed in no time by the concentrated massive land-based Chinese force.


American Generals might not understand Chinese military calculus 100%. Your statement that American bases in Japan will be crashed in no time is simply nonsense.
American
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:32 am

Re: China Studies

Postby hantze » Fri May 03, 2013 8:31 am

America knows about herself well but is not knowing about others. The two examples below will show some consequences of this.


The Pentagon has knowingly wasted about one billion dollars on the “Star Talk”, with 90% failure rate on the Mandarin. Its collaboration with Confucius Institute will produce more China sympathizers than patriotic Mandarin linguists.


American educators are no longer giving a damn about the welfare and the rights of their students when the big money is at the stake. Millions dollars will be gained by hosting a Confucius Institute. See general-discussion/is-it-wrong-to-the-young-students-t36.html .


With the two above happened, it is the beginning of the bad news.
hantze
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 12:49 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby Tienzen » Fri May 03, 2013 9:59 am

American wrote: Your statement that American bases in Japan will be crashed in no time is simply nonsense.



The major difference between the military calculus is that one puts the fire power as the first parameter while Chinese puts the foe’s weak spot (regardless of how powerful the foe is) as the first consideration. American Generals are used to smash the foe with the overwhelming power without the consideration of foe’s strong or weak points. Considering foe’s weak point is not the habit (or the culture) of the American style.


However powerful the F-22 and the stealth bombers are, they are just toys if they have no place to land and have no GPS to help. Thus, Chinese calculation is very simple. Can Chinese force flatten the air strips used by those fighters and bombers? Can Chinese force knock out the GPS system? If the answers are Yes, then those super powerful planes are simply trashes.
Tienzen
Founder
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: USA

Re: China Studies

Postby papabear » Fri May 03, 2013 1:08 pm

hantze wrote:The Pentagon has knowingly wasted about one billion dollars on the “Star Talk”, with 90% failure rate on the Mandarin. Its collaboration with Confucius Institute will produce more China sympathizers than patriotic Mandarin linguists.

...

With the two above happened, it is the beginning of the bad news.



When a nation is no longer seeking the best, it is the beginning of the downfall.
papabear
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 7:38 pm

Re: China Studies

Postby American » Wed May 08, 2013 1:32 pm

Tienzen wrote:If the military means is the only way to resolve the Diaoyu Islands issue, the military action from China will not deal with only that small issue but will resolve the Ryukyu Islands issue.



On May 7, 2013, the 人 民日報 (Renmin Ribao, a Chinese government Newspaper) had a commentary saying that the sovereignty of the Ryukyu Islands can now be discussed together with this Diaoyu Islands issue. Your prediction was truly a genius.


Why is American think tanks (such as the Heritage foundation, the NBR, etc.) unable to do the same?
American
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:32 am

Re: China Studies

Postby papabear » Wed May 08, 2013 7:32 pm

American wrote: Your prediction was truly a genius.


Why is American think tanks (such as the Heritage foundation, the NBR, etc.) unable to do the same?



Without knowing Chinese way of thinking, those American think tanks can only do the “facts” (the moving events) analysis which is very superficial and shallow. Recently, they do employ some Chinese scholars who are mostly with anti-CCP mentality, that is, they of course cannot give a fair assessment on the issue. They only say the things that the American politicians want to hear. Furthermore, those Chinese scholars are quite shallow themselves, as they do not even know the etymology of their own names.


On the China study, American think tanks’ doing is a great self-masturbation, without the concern of the way of thinking of its foe. This works great when America is lopsided and overwhelmingly more powerful than her foe. This self-masturbation will no longer work in the case of dealing with China.
papabear
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 7:38 pm

PreviousNext

Return to China Studies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest