|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pugwall
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:23 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
A Most Remarkable Project (04/23/2008) (Qianlong via Sina.com)
Between April 14 to 16, the Qianlong reporter went to visit the Agence France Presse Beijing office twice, the Reuters Beijing office thrice and the Associated Press Beijing office twice in order to determine if the big three news agencies were objectively and fairly reporting the assault, vandalizing, looting and arson in Tibet, the Olympic torch relay and especially about how the Tibet splittists are sabotaging the latter. But the Qianlong reporter was turned away with the comment "You can look it up yourself on the Internet" being the common answer provided by these three biggest news agencies in the world.
Accordingly, the Qianlong reporter used the Reuters, AFP and AP search engines and found that these western media were disproportionate in terms of their reports wherein they deliberately over-amplified the voices of the Tibet splittists versus the protesting against the separatism and sabotage by the Dalai Lama. The western news agencies provided a one-sided tilt towards Tibet independence. This "selective reporting" prettified the "non-violent" "spiritual leader" image of the Dalai Lama in order to realize their ulterior goal.
On April 19, the Qianlong reporter went to the Reuters Chinese-language website and searched for the keyword "snatching the Olympic torch." The search result was that "there was nothing that matched 'snatching the Olympic torch; please revise your search requirements and try again." When "Tibet independence" and "assault, vandalizing, looting and arson" were searched, the result was that "the page could not be displayed."
On April 19, 20 and 21, the Qianlong reporter went to the English-language websites of AFP, AP and Reuters and used the search engine to look for keywords such as "Olympic torch," "Tibet" and "Dalai Lama". There were about 3,100 news photo over the past 30 days. Astonishingly, "Olympic torch" showed virtually no photos of overseas Chinese supporting the Beijing Olympics and waving the five-star national flags.
At the AFP website, the Qianlong reporter used "Olympic torch" as the keyword and restricted the search to April 7 in France. This resulted in 143 news photos. Among these, 95 were about the Tibet independence marchers and protestors or the attack on the Olympic torch relay runners and the local police. There were 4 photos that showed the Chinese protesting against the Tibet independence demonstration. There was not a single photo of any cheering for the Olympic torch or China.
At the Associated Press website, the Qianlong reporter found 186 news photos for the keyword "Olympic torch" for April 7. 96 of these are about the Tibet splittists smearing the Olympics and opposing China. There was no photo in support of China and the Olympics.
At the Reuters website, the reporter entered "Dalai Lama" on April 19 and found 744 reports about the Dalai Lama expressing views about Tibetan independence. As for news photos, there were 21 of them. When the Qianlong reporter repeated the exercise on April 21, there were 556 photos related to the Dalai Lama, including one photo of American president George W. Bush meeting with the Dalai Lama credited to "Reuters/Jim Young."
... There were 409 unique photos among the 556 news photos. Of these, 354 were about the travels, meetings, religious activities and peaceful petitions in support of Tibet independence as well as glorifying "Tibet's exiled spiritual leader." By contrast, there were only 13 photos about the assault, vandalizing, lotting and arson committed by the Dalai Lama clique. With this huge discrepancy, how must credibility is there about "objectivity and fairness"?
On April 19, the "Dalai Lama" keyword at Associated Press resulted in 476 news photos, most of which are about the Dalai Lama visiting the United States and meeting with important politicians. There were also photos of Tibet splittists protesting in the form of "peaceful" petitions as well as making a show at the Olympic torch relay. But there was nothing about the Chinese people protesting against the evil deeds of the Dalai Lama and the Tibet splittists.
On April 19, the Qianlong reporter visited the AFP website and used the keyword "Dalai Lama" to find 483 news photos, with the contents being comparablethose at Reuters and Associated Press ...
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200804c.brief.htm#004 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pugwall wrote: |
| I'm sorry Typhoon, I understand you are upset here but I am finding it hard to distinguish what you are saying from the Chinese saying that there has been a 50 years conspiracy by the CIA to bring down China. If we want to extol the virtues of our democracy and our free press then we must be ready to take on board and challenge any supposed bias otherwise our democracy is not what it claims to be. The Chinese do have fairly legitimate claims, the Western press have crucified the Chinese while writing nothing of the positives in the country. The main claim tho is that Tibetans rioted and attacked and killed Han innocents but the Western press just focused on the police crackdown afterwards. The only information given to us about the crackdown has been proven to be false. So it has been claimed that the Western press took the side of the Tibetans in a moment of crisis. Now reject this if you want after going through the evidence. To reject it out of hand as nothing but 'crap' puts our press on the same level as the Chinese news agency's. |
Let's look at the USA. Irancontra scandal. The illegal funding of contras in Central and South America. The crapstorm the USA has had to face over Iraq and Afghanistan. The Americans have been held accountable by their own gov't and media around the world for their idiotic, selfish and immoral activities. What China has done over the past 2 years (let's not even get into Pakistan) has been as bad or worse, yet they have not been held accountable for their actions by the western media. Why is that?
The western media focuses on Tibet, because it is the least objectionable of Chinese actions. The western media has been horrible in covering China if the truth be told. China is a brutal regime and funds other brutal regimes. The fact that the Olympics is being held there is an absolute joke. There should be protests about China holding the Olympics and they should not be about Tibet. Tibet is nothing compared to the miseries other countries are facing due to Chinese funding and arms. Yes, what happened to Tibets (the slaughter of nearly all the monks in Tibet in the 1950s and destruction of all major temples) was horrible, but it is not any worse than what China has been doing since the 1980s around the world. China has really had a free pass for their actions from the media and they should be thankful that the media is only focusing on Tibet right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pugwall wrote: |
A Most Remarkable Project (04/23/2008) (Qianlong via Sina.com)
Between April 14 to 16, the Qianlong reporter went to visit the Agence France Presse Beijing office twice, the Reuters Beijing office thrice and the Associated Press Beijing office twice in order to determine if the big three news agencies were objectively and fairly reporting the assault, vandalizing, looting and arson in Tibet, the Olympic torch relay and especially about how the Tibet splittists are sabotaging the latter. But the Qianlong reporter was turned away with the comment "You can look it up yourself on the Internet" being the common answer provided by these three biggest news agencies in the world.
Accordingly, the Qianlong reporter used the Reuters, AFP and AP search engines and found that these western media were disproportionate in terms of their reports wherein they deliberately over-amplified the voices of the Tibet splittists versus the protesting against the separatism and sabotage by the Dalai Lama. The western news agencies provided a one-sided tilt towards Tibet independence. This "selective reporting" prettified the "non-violent" "spiritual leader" image of the Dalai Lama in order to realize their ulterior goal.
On April 19, the Qianlong reporter went to the Reuters Chinese-language website and searched for the keyword "snatching the Olympic torch." The search result was that "there was nothing that matched 'snatching the Olympic torch; please revise your search requirements and try again." When "Tibet independence" and "assault, vandalizing, looting and arson" were searched, the result was that "the page could not be displayed."
On April 19, 20 and 21, the Qianlong reporter went to the English-language websites of AFP, AP and Reuters and used the search engine to look for keywords such as "Olympic torch," "Tibet" and "Dalai Lama". There were about 3,100 news photo over the past 30 days. Astonishingly, "Olympic torch" showed virtually no photos of overseas Chinese supporting the Beijing Olympics and waving the five-star national flags.
At the AFP website, the Qianlong reporter used "Olympic torch" as the keyword and restricted the search to April 7 in France. This resulted in 143 news photos. Among these, 95 were about the Tibet independence marchers and protestors or the attack on the Olympic torch relay runners and the local police. There were 4 photos that showed the Chinese protesting against the Tibet independence demonstration. There was not a single photo of any cheering for the Olympic torch or China.
At the Associated Press website, the Qianlong reporter found 186 news photos for the keyword "Olympic torch" for April 7. 96 of these are about the Tibet splittists smearing the Olympics and opposing China. There was no photo in support of China and the Olympics.
At the Reuters website, the reporter entered "Dalai Lama" on April 19 and found 744 reports about the Dalai Lama expressing views about Tibetan independence. As for news photos, there were 21 of them. When the Qianlong reporter repeated the exercise on April 21, there were 556 photos related to the Dalai Lama, including one photo of American president George W. Bush meeting with the Dalai Lama credited to "Reuters/Jim Young."
... There were 409 unique photos among the 556 news photos. Of these, 354 were about the travels, meetings, religious activities and peaceful petitions in support of Tibet independence as well as glorifying "Tibet's exiled spiritual leader." By contrast, there were only 13 photos about the assault, vandalizing, lotting and arson committed by the Dalai Lama clique. With this huge discrepancy, how must credibility is there about "objectivity and fairness"?
On April 19, the "Dalai Lama" keyword at Associated Press resulted in 476 news photos, most of which are about the Dalai Lama visiting the United States and meeting with important politicians. There were also photos of Tibet splittists protesting in the form of "peaceful" petitions as well as making a show at the Olympic torch relay. But there was nothing about the Chinese people protesting against the evil deeds of the Dalai Lama and the Tibet splittists.
On April 19, the Qianlong reporter visited the AFP website and used the keyword "Dalai Lama" to find 483 news photos, with the contents being comparablethose at Reuters and Associated Press ...
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200804c.brief.htm#004 |
The funny thing about these "supporters" overseas is that they have been rounded up by the embassies and told that they will participate in pro-China rallies. They were also given their flags, signs and shirts by the embassy. If they did not particiapte they knew what would happen to their permission to leave China (they will have to return) and their families in China. If people have to be forced to go to a pro-China rally is it realy vaild? I don't think so. Imagine the Canadian emabssy in South Korea rounding up all Canadian in South Korea and informing them that they will be in a pro-Canada rally and forcing them to go. That would not fly. China is truly a wonderful place.
Another funny thing is that all foriegn visas in China have been limited to one month prior to the Olympics. Want to know why? The message is being sent that if foreigners within China want to stay there they will toe the party-line. Once again, China must truly be wonderful if they have to force citizens and foreigners to project the picture of China that the gov't wants projected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Typhoon wrote: |
| China is a brutal regime and funds other brutal regimes. The fact that the Olympics is being held there is an absolute joke. There should be protests about China holding the Olympics and they should not be about Tibet. Tibet is nothing compared to the miseries other countries are facing due to Chinese funding and arms. Yes, what happened to Tibets (the slaughter of nearly all the monks in Tibet in the 1950s and destruction of all major temples) was horrible, but it is not any worse than what China has been doing since the 1980s around the world. China has really had a free pass for their actions from the media and they should be thankful that the media is only focusing on Tibet right now. |
This is true.
Do you have a link for your assertion about visas? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugwall
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Typhoon wrote: |
| pugwall wrote: |
| I'm sorry Typhoon, I understand you are upset here but I am finding it hard to distinguish what you are saying from the Chinese saying that there has been a 50 years conspiracy by the CIA to bring down China. If we want to extol the virtues of our democracy and our free press then we must be ready to take on board and challenge any supposed bias otherwise our democracy is not what it claims to be. The Chinese do have fairly legitimate claims, the Western press have crucified the Chinese while writing nothing of the positives in the country. The main claim tho is that Tibetans rioted and attacked and killed Han innocents but the Western press just focused on the police crackdown afterwards. The only information given to us about the crackdown has been proven to be false. So it has been claimed that the Western press took the side of the Tibetans in a moment of crisis. Now reject this if you want after going through the evidence. To reject it out of hand as nothing but 'crap' puts our press on the same level as the Chinese news agency's. |
Let's look at the USA. Irancontra scandal. The illegal funding of contras in Central and South America. The crapstorm the USA has had to face over Iraq and Afghanistan. The Americans have been held accountable by their own gov't and media around the world for their idiotic, selfish and immoral activities. What China has done over the past 2 years (let's not even get into Pakistan) has been as bad or worse, yet they have not been held accountable for their actions by the western media. Why is that?
The western media focuses on Tibet, because it is the least objectionable of Chinese actions. The western media has been horrible in covering China if the truth be told. China is a brutal regime and funds other brutal regimes. The fact that the Olympics is being held there is an absolute joke. There should be protests about China holding the Olympics and they should not be about Tibet. Tibet is nothing compared to the miseries other countries are facing due to Chinese funding and arms. Yes, what happened to Tibets (the slaughter of nearly all the monks in Tibet in the 1950s and destruction of all major temples) was horrible, but it is not any worse than what China has been doing since the 1980s around the world. China has really had a free pass for their actions from the media and they should be thankful that the media is only focusing on Tibet right now. |
Yeah but the way the Chinese see it woud be similar to the world press supporting Al Qaeda. I don't know where you get this free pass thing from(your pretty much out on your own as well). China has been routinely condemmed for everything they do while not getting credit for their positive impact or actions.
We really need to bridge this gap right now because the consequences could be dire. The Chinese can only see us as Sinophobes and hypocrites.
A conversation between the Western nations and China would read as something like this...
West: You are funding the Sudan government to get oil
China: Ok but we are doing a lot of good stuff in Africa as well. Your countries raped and pillaged Africa for all it had. You launched a war on Iraq for oil.
West: You are supporting the Burmese junta:
China: hmmm Saudi Arabia
West: Well you are a bunch of stoopid heads.
If that can give you some kind of indication of the feeling of unfair vindication China feels right now. Ok if individuals want to protest but for governments to boycott. If you don't think China is getting better than go there. When we quietly coerce China behind the scenes changes can be made - like N. Korea. China would not have taken the same stance as today as ten years ago. They should be more mature and take criticism in public but its a pretty Childish and ultra sensitive government unsure of its own sovereignty and too scared of losing face. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
China has gotten a free pass because they are a side note for Burma, Dafur, and Zimbabwe. Newspapers gloss over Chinese involvment/support in these problems and many other problems around the world. The problem with your example using the United States is that everyone knows of their involvement and wrong doings because the media constantly holds them accountable (rightfully so by the way).
China has never had to deal with that. Look at the latest situation in Zimbabwe and Mr. Mugabe. China was not taken to task by the media. They called the boat shipping arms a Chinese boat, but didn't call out China for trying to arm Mugabe. China knew very well what those arms were for and the damage the would cause. The States would have been crucified by the media if that had been caught red handed doing something like that. Yes, all countries have done a lot of bad things. The USA probably more than any others, but as of late they have been pretty good and China has taken the over the role of shamelessly supporting the bad guys of the world. It was wrong when the USA did it and they have been held accountable by the media for their actions. What China is doing is also wrong, however the media seems content to concentrate on Tibet. China should thank their lucky stars that the media isn't focusing on the real bad stuff they do abroad and within their borders. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugwall
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Typhoon wrote: |
China has gotten a free pass because they are a side note for Burma, Dafur, and Zimbabwe. Newspapers gloss over Chinese involvment/support in these problems and many other problems around the world. The problem with your example using the United States is that everyone knows of their involvement and wrong doings because the media constantly holds them accountable (rightfully so by the way).
China has never had to deal with that. Look at the latest situation in Zimbabwe and Mr. Mugabe. China was not taken to task by the media. They called the boat shipping arms a Chinese boat, but didn't call out China for trying to arm Mugabe. China knew very well what those arms were for and the damage the would cause. The States would have been crucified by the media if that had been caught red handed doing something like that. Yes, all countries have done a lot of bad things. The USA probably more than any others, but as of late they have been pretty good and China has taken the over the role of shamelessly supporting the bad guys of the world. It was wrong when the USA did it and they have been held accountable by the media for their actions. What China is doing is also wrong, however the media seems content to concentrate on Tibet. China should thank their lucky stars that the media isn't focusing on the real bad stuff they do abroad and within their borders. |
I think you are being overly defensive Typhoon. I'm sure you are a lovely guy and everything. But the media has been crucifying China of late. Just run through the archive of a mainstream broadsheets website and count the pro China articles compared to the anti- china ones. Guns to Mugabe at this time is fucking disgraceful and makes me wonder if the CCP foreign ministry have any idea what they are doing but the US has bee giving guns to Israel for years. China's involvement in Africa is a lot more three dimensional but you only hear of the negative side. China has raised its African aid recently while aid from US and Europe has decreased. We never hear abou that or maybe you do. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/24/china.zimbabwe
Ok its all realopolitik and it sucks but it seems pretty churlish to blame China ( a developing country) for playing by the same rules which aided our rise and the same rules we use today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A lot of what you have said is true, but it is important to remember that China could do things better than the West. The West did a lot of terrible things and have reaped their just rewards lately. 9/11 in the States is just one small example of how terrible actions come back to haunt you later on. China could be learning from the mistakes the world has made already and becoming a better nation instead of another USA. Having them continue to fund muderous regimes like the US did throughout the 50, 60s, 70's, 80's, and early 90's (and somewhat still today) is inexcusible because we have seen where the funding of these regimes leads.
Yes, China does do some good in the world, but it doesn't mean anything if they are still funding murderers and killing there citizens for speaking out. It is like me beating the crap out of my daughter every night, but buying her presents and nice clothes to try to make it up to her. The presents and nice clothes don't they don't make me anyless of a creep.
I can't help but wonder that if China holding a great deal of the USA's debt has anything to do with the lighthanded approach the American media has taken with China. Yes, there has been some negative press about China lately, but no where near what there should be given that they are about to host an international event that is about peace. If China wants to get some positive press it could be very easy. They could come out against the Dafur massacre and stop buying oil, instead of supporting. They could use their influence in Africa to get Mugabe to step down, instead of supporting him. They could lead the crusade to wipe out 3rd world debt and show the world that money isn't everything (actually following communist doctrine). However, they will not do any of these things for the same reason the USA wouldn't do them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The article you posted while very interesting does not portray China in a positive way. It states that while doing some good, China is mostly taking advantage of African nations in order to get their natural resources. It states that if African countries hope to benefit from China they will have to insist on trade clauses that ensure minimum labour rights, human rights and environmental standards that will protect African nations from Chinese explotation. You should read all the way to the end of the article. Yes, the Chinese are doing some good, but it is in hopes of exploiting African resources so they can maintain their current level of growth. Really, what China is doing here is no different from European nations in the mid-late 1800s in Africa and the USA has done throughout the world in the 20th century.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugwall
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Typhoon wrote: |
The article you posted while very interesting does not portray China in a positive way. It states that while doing some good, China is mostly taking advantage of African nations in order to get their natural resources. It states that if African countries hope to benefit from China they will have to insist on trade clauses that ensure minimum labour rights, human rights and environmental standards that will protect African nations from Chinese explotation. You should read all the way to the end of the article. Yes, the Chinese are doing some good, but it is in hopes of exploiting African resources so they can maintain their current level of growth. Really, what China is doing here is no different from European nations in the mid-late 1800s in Africa and the USA has done throughout the world in the 20th century.
|
I have read it through. China is building infastructure and they are just based on business. Like I said there is good and bad, China's place in the world or its presence in Africa is three dimensional and has positives and negatives. It is far from a mature nation but it took our countries time to get to were they are and the road is always pretty dity along the way. At least it looks like they are moving very slowly in the right direction.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article642345.ece
But we cannot escpae that many of the friends they are making a reprehensible. Nobody should be in Burma or Zimbabwe right now. The Chinese government in its present incarnation is only 30 years old and they are young and care too much about keeping face or making mistakes. It does seem from sources that they will negotiate behind the scenes. Lee Kuan Yew the Singapore leader can probably give us the closest character description of the Chinese leasers that we are going to get. He generally leaves a good impression and says that the top leaders are clean and trying to do a good job.
Lee on Deng
But what impressed me was, the next day in our talks in Singapore, I said, "You spent all this time to convince me why we should fight the Russian bear. Let me tell you that my neighbors want me to join them to fight you, you're the man who's giving us trouble. All this communist insurgency and your broadcasts urging them on and so on." He screwed up his eyes, peered at me, and asked, "What do you want me to do?" I said, "Stop it." One young man telling one old grizzly, guerrilla fighter: "Stop it." He said, "Give me time." Eighteen months later he stopped it. That man faced reality. I'm convinced that his visit to Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, that journey, in November '78, was a shock to him. He expected three third-world cities; he saw three second-world cities, better than Shanghai or Beijing. As his aircraft door closed, I turned around to my colleagues, I said, [his aides] are getting a shellacking. They gave him the wrong brief. Within weeks, the People's Daily switched lines, that Singapore is no longer a running dog of the Americans, it's a very nice city, a garden city, good public housing, very clean place. They changed their line. And he changed to the "open door" policy. After a lifetime as a communist, at the age of 74, he persuaded his Long March contemporaries to return to a market economy.
[/url]http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501051212/lky_intvu6.html
[url]
We can see that the government is open to persuausion. They need to be mature and open themselves up to discussion and press conferences. This is going to take time and it seems they are addressing the problem
Chinese officials say they are working on ways to improve their image through better public diplomacy.
"We need to be more open and transparent. We need to respond more quickly. The usual way we react when we are criticised is to be defensive and say nothing. This is a bad habit," one official said
[/url]http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/simon_tisdall/2008/04/awakening_the_dragon.html[url]
Boycotting the Olympics will have no positive consequences and a host of negative ones. As you said Beijing has Washington by the cojones right now and smooth relationships are imperative. China could operate on a level of self sufficency and like the pig headed Korean hagwon boss will be prepared to shoot themselves in the foot rather than lose face. Boycotting the olympics is mainly going to punish the Chinese people who have worked so hard and have spent so much time and energy preparing for the olympics. Unless you go to China its hard to understand how much the olympics meant to them and how excited they were. No they feel hurt and are in shock just like the US in 9/11. They question you see everywhere on places like Anti-cnn.com is 'Why do they hate us?' echoes America 7 years ago.
Things are getting better for them and they have more freedom of speech and press than they could have dreamed of even five years ago. Nobody in China believes what they read on Xinhua or China Daily anymore and prefer to use sites like Zuola [/url]http://www.zuola.com/[url] whose byline translated to English reads This site operates on a principle that "media should not be owned by government; from government comes propaganda. We all know, as common sense, information from CCTV is not all that believable. Treat it similarly with Westerners' quoting of RFA
Things are not perfect but domestically are definitely moving in the right direction.
Sorry this post is so disjointed, I am not at home. It's not a proper response to all your points either. Anyway boycotting the olympics and attcking the torch will only bring disaster. It punishes the athletes and the Chinese people while the governments position is only reinforced as we have seen with the ultra nationalism visible in the last few weeks. If we want to pass judgement we must lobby our governments. From reading the responses from the Chinese on places like global voices[/url]http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/[url] where they translate blogs and forums it feels like we could be moving towards a huge rift and even a new cold war. Only a successful Olympics can remedy this.[/url] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pugwall wrote: |
| Ok but we are doing a lot of good stuff in Africa as well. Your countries raped and pillaged Africa for all it had. |
This myth needs to be dispelled. Belguim was about the only country you could accuse of raping a part of Africa - now know as Congo and the DRC - and even then it was largely the responsibility of King Leopold as an individual. In many parts of Africa it is becoming evident that African blacks were better off under imperfect white government as opposed to self rule. Zimbabwe is probably the best example of this, and South Africa as well. The only blacks to benefit from the 'winds of change' are arguably the cronies of the dictatorial regimes that replaced the colonial masters. China is not in Africa on a moral mission to correct the 'wrongs' of colonial rule; China is hungry for Africa's mineral wealth to feed it's economic growth. China has to give Africa something back - in this case help to modernise it's antiquated infrastructure - otherwise the deal just wouldn't get off the ground. It's not as though the infrastructure as never there either; the Africans themselves managed to mismanage their economies to the extent that the internal development spear headed by the whites was wrecked and left to ruin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gwangjuboy
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Location: England
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pugwall wrote: |
Lee Kuan Yew the Singapore leader can probably give us the closest character description of the Chinese leasers that we are going to get. He generally leaves a good impression and says that the top leaders are clean and trying to do a good job.
|
Not the best referee in the world. It's also worth noting that Stalin had his admirers back in the day too. Hitler wasn't short on a few either, Kennedy's old man was a fan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugwall
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| pugwall wrote: |
| Ok but we are doing a lot of good stuff in Africa as well. Your countries raped and pillaged Africa for all it had. |
This myth needs to be dispelled. Belguim was about the only country you could accuse of raping a part of Africa - now know as Congo and the DRC - and even then it was largely the responsibility of King Leopold as an individual. In many parts of Africa it is becoming evident that African blacks were better off under imperfect white government as opposed to self rule. Zimbabwe is probably the best example of this, and South Africa as well. The only blacks to benefit from the 'winds of change' are arguably the cronies of the dictatorial regimes that replaced the colonial masters. China is not in Africa on a moral mission to correct the 'wrongs' of colonial rule; China is hungry for Africa's mineral wealth to feed it's economic growth. China has to give Africa something back - in this case help to modernise it's antiquated infrastructure - otherwise the deal just wouldn't get off the ground. It's not as though the infrastructure as never there either; the Africans themselves managed to mismanage their economies to the extent that the internal development spear headed by the whites was wrecked and left to ruin. |
I agree with you but mistrust of Western powers is pretty high. The US tried to assinate Patrice Lumumba of the Congo in the 60's. Chinese obviously are not in Africa for philanthropical reason but seeing as NGO's seem to have made little or no progress in 50 years maybe its time for hard business. As an example China recently built the African union building in Addis Abbahttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/africa_enl_1194627826/html/1.stm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pugwall
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gwangjuboy wrote: |
| pugwall wrote: |
Lee Kuan Yew the Singapore leader can probably give us the closest character description of the Chinese leasers that we are going to get. He generally leaves a good impression and says that the top leaders are clean and trying to do a good job.
|
Not the best referee in the world. It's also worth noting that Stalin had his admirers back in the day too. Hitler wasn't short on a few either, Kennedy's old man was a fan. |
How many South East Asian economic miracles have you spearheaded today? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007
Location: Daejeon
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pugwall wrote: |
| Typhoon wrote: |
The article you posted while very interesting does not portray China in a positive way. It states that while doing some good, China is mostly taking advantage of African nations in order to get their natural resources. It states that if African countries hope to benefit from China they will have to insist on trade clauses that ensure minimum labour rights, human rights and environmental standards that will protect African nations from Chinese explotation. You should read all the way to the end of the article. Yes, the Chinese are doing some good, but it is in hopes of exploiting African resources so they can maintain their current level of growth. Really, what China is doing here is no different from European nations in the mid-late 1800s in Africa and the USA has done throughout the world in the 20th century.
|
I have read it through. China is building infastructure and they are just based on business. Like I said there is good and bad, China's place in the world or its presence in Africa is three dimensional and has positives and negatives. It is far from a mature nation but it took our countries time to get to were they are and the road is always pretty dity along the way. At least it looks like they are moving very slowly in the right direction.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article642345.ece
But we cannot escpae that many of the friends they are making a reprehensible. Nobody should be in Burma or Zimbabwe right now. The Chinese government in its present incarnation is only 30 years old and they are young and care too much about keeping face or making mistakes. It does seem from sources that they will negotiate behind the scenes. Lee Kuan Yew the Singapore leader can probably give us the closest character description of the Chinese leasers that we are going to get. He generally leaves a good impression and says that the top leaders are clean and trying to do a good job.
Lee on Deng
But what impressed me was, the next day in our talks in Singapore, I said, "You spent all this time to convince me why we should fight the Russian bear. Let me tell you that my neighbors want me to join them to fight you, you're the man who's giving us trouble. All this communist insurgency and your broadcasts urging them on and so on." He screwed up his eyes, peered at me, and asked, "What do you want me to do?" I said, "Stop it." One young man telling one old grizzly, guerrilla fighter: "Stop it." He said, "Give me time." Eighteen months later he stopped it. That man faced reality. I'm convinced that his visit to Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, that journey, in November '78, was a shock to him. He expected three third-world cities; he saw three second-world cities, better than Shanghai or Beijing. As his aircraft door closed, I turned around to my colleagues, I said, [his aides] are getting a shellacking. They gave him the wrong brief. Within weeks, the People's Daily switched lines, that Singapore is no longer a running dog of the Americans, it's a very nice city, a garden city, good public housing, very clean place. They changed their line. And he changed to the "open door" policy. After a lifetime as a communist, at the age of 74, he persuaded his Long March contemporaries to return to a market economy.
[/url]http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/501051212/lky_intvu6.html
[url]
We can see that the government is open to persuausion. They need to be mature and open themselves up to discussion and press conferences. This is going to take time and it seems they are addressing the problem
Chinese officials say they are working on ways to improve their image through better public diplomacy.
"We need to be more open and transparent. We need to respond more quickly. The usual way we react when we are criticised is to be defensive and say nothing. This is a bad habit," one official said
[/url]http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/simon_tisdall/2008/04/awakening_the_dragon.html[url]
Boycotting the Olympics will have no positive consequences and a host of negative ones. As you said Beijing has Washington by the cojones right now and smooth relationships are imperative. China could operate on a level of self sufficency and like the pig headed Korean hagwon boss will be prepared to shoot themselves in the foot rather than lose face. Boycotting the olympics is mainly going to punish the Chinese people who have worked so hard and have spent so much time and energy preparing for the olympics. Unless you go to China its hard to understand how much the olympics meant to them and how excited they were. No they feel hurt and are in shock just like the US in 9/11. They question you see everywhere on places like Anti-cnn.com is 'Why do they hate us?' echoes America 7 years ago.
Things are getting better for them and they have more freedom of speech and press than they could have dreamed of even five years ago. Nobody in China believes what they read on Xinhua or China Daily anymore and prefer to use sites like Zuola [/url]http://www.zuola.com/[url] whose byline translated to English reads This site operates on a principle that "media should not be owned by government; from government comes propaganda. We all know, as common sense, information from CCTV is not all that believable. Treat it similarly with Westerners' quoting of RFA
Things are not perfect but domestically are definitely moving in the right direction.
Sorry this post is so disjointed, I am not at home. It's not a proper response to all your points either. Anyway boycotting the olympics and attcking the torch will only bring disaster. It punishes the athletes and the Chinese people while the governments position is only reinforced as we have seen with the ultra nationalism visible in the last few weeks. If we want to pass judgement we must lobby our governments. From reading the responses from the Chinese on places like global voices[/url]http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/[url] where they translate blogs and forums it feels like we could be moving towards a huge rift and even a new cold war. Only a successful Olympics can remedy this.[/url] |
An excellent post. One of the best posts I have read on this board actually. Yes, China is getting better. There is no denying that. Also, you are right boycotting the Olympics would hurt the people of China. However, that may be what China needs to become more a responsible nation. It could also go the other way and turn China more nationalistic that it already is. Hopefully, the people of China have some understanding why citizens of the world are unhappy with China's actions around the world and within China itself. It would be a shame for them to think that the protests are just anti-Chinese because that is just not the case.
The IOC should never have given the Olympics to China for 2008. The Olympics should have been used as a reward like it was for Seoul in 1988. The condition of Seoul getting the games was that there was a peaceful turnover of power via a transparent election without someone trying to seize the position of president (election of 1987). If this didn't happen then Seoul was aware that the 1988 games were going to be cancelled. The IOC very well could have used the Olympics as an incentive for China to become a more humane nation. Unfortunently the IOC selection process is about who gives the biggest bribe and China was willing to give more than any other candidate for the 2008 games.
In the end you are right. It is up to the gov'ts and corporations of the world to get China to become more resposible. This isn't very comforting as corporations are worried about making money and as long as China is allowing them to make cheap products and to sell their products within China not too many corporations are going to speak out against China. The same goes for gov'ts of the world. China has very wisely given loans to the powers of the world so they can keep running huge deficits. If gov'ts crack down on China too much, China just needs to demand repayment of the loan from the country or invoke the IMF on them to get their money back. No 1st world country wants that. Countries may not like what China is doing, but they will choose their words and actions very carefully when it comes to dealing with China. Money is all to often the bottom line. Another shining example of why capitalism just isn't working. I am not sure how many more examples we need to understand this. We have had 100 years of experiences to see that capitalism is a system that is bound to fail in the end. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
