Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> By Martin Jacques > Allen Lane £30, 550 pages > FT Bookshop price £20
> Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, > more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the > age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds > little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic > progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular > – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: > “When China’s miracle goes phut”.
> Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will > be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India > which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the > “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be > politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
> We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s > GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an > almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. > These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can > be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen > to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
> Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat > laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions > about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful > economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been > European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- > jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries > modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the > world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it > would be like if it was not,” he writes.
> Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, > huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality > of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what > it is to be modern.
> If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic > one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese > confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries > of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up > with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the > world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China > is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on > a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.
> China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he > argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. > He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed > the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict > that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, > about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
> Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its > past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary > relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long > as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living > civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a > nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, > particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
> Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values > will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying > values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories > and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and > history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there > is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
> That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that > emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate > themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in > culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses > the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, > that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag > than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far > the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for > community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for > stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian > culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition > not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. > These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean > advertisement for Asian values.
> Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with > multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture > more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. > “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest > of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will > confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In > what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China > as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to > other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken > it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe > feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least > postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
> In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and > racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about > competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world > power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- > way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions > circulate of what it means to be modern.
> In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study > Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn > from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business > practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans > may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. > It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and > culturally layered than recreated in China’s image. That is the whole > point: China will not rule the world.
> David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT’s Asia edition
On Oct 22, 1:06 am, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the > pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder > Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website:http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before > his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER > department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't > somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> It makes you think.
He injected the element of race in his book.
"In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions circulate of what it means to be modern."
I am surprised that his wife was a victim of racism. If she spoke Chinese then would be considered Chinese, racism is not involved. If she spoke English, she would be treated better than the average HKers although not as good as a white person. Is this racism?
Anyway, all these reflects HKers which was a Britsih colony for 150+ years rather than Chinese people in general. In addition, HKers' respect to white folks and English speakers reflects the reality that
1. English speakers complain more readily. 2. More likely to complain loudly. And 3. Their complains are more likely to reach a high place.
Of course white people know when and where to play the race card intuitively if they choose to. Martin Jacques was playing dumb or lying outright when he opened his essay with
"I always found race difficult to understand. It was never intuitive. And the reason was simple. Like every other white person, I had never experienced it myself: the meaning of colour was something I had to learn."
> > By Martin Jacques > > Allen Lane £30, 550 pages > > FT Bookshop price £20
> > Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, > > more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the > > age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds > > little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic > > progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular > > – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: > > “When China’s miracle goes phut”.
> > Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will > > be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India > > which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the > > “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be > > politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
> > We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s > > GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an > > almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. > > These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can > > be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen > > to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
> > Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat > > laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions > > about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful > > economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been > > European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- > > jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries > > modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the > > world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it > > would be like if it was not,” he writes.
> > Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, > > huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality > > of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what > > it is to be modern.
> > If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic > > one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese > > confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries > > of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up > > with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the > > world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China > > is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on > > a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.
> > China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he > > argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. > > He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed > > the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict > > that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, > > about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
> > Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its > > past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary > > relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long > > as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living > > civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a > > nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, > > particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
> > Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values > > will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying > > values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories > > and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and > > history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there > > is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
> > That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that > > emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate > > themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in > > culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses > > the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, > > that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag > > than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far > > the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for > > community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for > > stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian > > culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition > > not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. > > These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean > > advertisement for Asian values.
> > Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with > > multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture > > more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. > > “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest > > of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will > > confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In > > what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China > > as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to > > other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken > > it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe > > feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least > > postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
> > In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > > rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > > centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and > > racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > > more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about > > competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world > > power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- > > way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions > > circulate of what it means to be modern.
> > In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study > > Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn > > from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business > > practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans > > may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. > > It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and > > culturally layered than recreated in China’s image. That is the whole > > point: China will not rule the world.
> > David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT’s Asia edition
> > ---------------------------- Hide quoted text -
> On Oct 22, 1:06 am, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > > familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > > it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the > > pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder > > Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website:http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before > > his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER > > department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't > > somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
> > I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> > It makes you think.
> He injected the element of race in his book.
> "In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural > and > racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about > competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world > power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- > way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions > circulate of what it means to be modern."
> I am surprised that his wife was a victim of racism. > If she spoke Chinese then would be considered Chinese, racism is not > involved. If she spoke English, she would be treated better than the > average HKers although not as good as a white person. Is this racism?
> Anyway, all these reflects HKers which was a Britsih colony for 150+ > years rather than Chinese people in general. In addition, HKers' > respect to white folks and English speakers reflects the reality that
> 1. English speakers complain more readily. > 2. More likely to complain loudly. And > 3. Their complains are more likely to reach a high place.
> Of course white people know when and where to play the race card > intuitively if they choose to. Martin Jacques was playing dumb or > lying outright when he opened his essay with
> "I always found race difficult to understand. It was never intuitive. > And the reason was simple. Like every other white person, I had never > experienced it myself: the meaning of colour was something I had to > learn."
> > > By Martin Jacques > > > Allen Lane £30, 550 pages > > > FT Bookshop price £20
> > > Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, > > > more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the > > > age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds > > > little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic > > > progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular > > > – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: > > > “When China’s miracle goes phut”.
> > > Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will > > > be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India > > > which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the > > > “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be > > > politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
> > > We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s > > > GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an > > > almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. > > > These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can > > > be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen > > > to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
> > > Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat > > > laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions > > > about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful > > > economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been > > > European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- > > > jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries > > > modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the > > > world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it > > > would be like if it was not,” he writes.
> > > Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, > > > huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality > > > of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what > > > it is to be modern.
> > > If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic > > > one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese > > > confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries > > > of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up > > > with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the > > > world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China > > > is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on > > > a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.
> > > China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he > > > argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. > > > He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed > > > the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict > > > that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, > > > about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
> > > Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its > > > past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary > > > relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long > > > as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living > > > civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a > > > nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, > > > particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
> > > Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values > > > will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying > > > values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories > > > and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and > > > history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there > > > is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
> > > That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that > > > emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate > > > themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in > > > culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses > > > the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, > > > that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag > > > than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far > > > the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for > > > community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for > > > stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian > > > culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition > > > not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. > > > These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean > > > advertisement for Asian values.
> > > Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with > > > multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture > > > more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. > > > “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest > > > of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will > > > confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In > > > what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China > > > as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to > > > other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken > > > it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe > > > feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least > > > postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
> > > In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > > > rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > > > centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and > > > racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > > > more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks
Free Tibet wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid > <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: >> http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>> It makes you think.
> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did > not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public > life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial > violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and > is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. > Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the > different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply > rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle > Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese > civilization. > http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
> Just ask the Tibetans.
Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those still hanging 'round home?
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Thu Oct 22 14:20:33 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
ltlee1 wrote: > On Oct 22, 1:06 am, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website:http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>> It makes you think.
> He injected the element of race in his book.
> "In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural > and > racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about > competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world > power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- > way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions > circulate of what it means to be modern."
> I am surprised that his wife was a victim of racism. > If she spoke Chinese then would be considered Chinese, racism is not > involved. If she spoke English, she would be treated better than the > average HKers although not as good as a white person. Is this racism?
> Anyway, all these reflects HKers which was a Britsih colony for 150+ > years rather than Chinese people in general. In addition, HKers' > respect to white folks and English speakers reflects the reality that
> 1. English speakers complain more readily. > 2. More likely to complain loudly. And > 3. Their complains are more likely to reach a high place.
> Of course white people know when and where to play the race card > intuitively if they choose to. Martin Jacques was playing dumb or > lying outright when he opened his essay with
> "I always found race difficult to understand. It was never intuitive. > And the reason was simple. Like every other white person, I had never > experienced it myself: the meaning of colour was something I had to > learn."
Quote from a 2000 Guardian article: "In 1959, [Harinder Veriah's] father Karam Singh became the youngest MP in the first parliament of independent Malaysia, sitting for the Socialist Party. Shortly after Veriah's birth he was held in detention for four years for organising a militant march of rubber plantation workers. Since 1994 [Harinder Veriah] had been linked with a man of equally patent leftwing background, Marxism Today's Martin Jacques: they married in 1996."
You have to open up your eyes. It's this type of lukewarm maudlin emotional activism that precisely fuels that fervent anarchist impulse of the French Revolution and American neoconservatism to begin with, in remaking the world in its own utopian image (in this case race and ancestry is supposed to be figment of imagination), in defiance of not just venerable Chinese but pre-mid-20th century Western tradition and vast swathes of human history itself. These are poisonous ideas, and you should at least take note that those who so seemingly "befriend" China even if they may be useful in the short run can still turn out to be its worst long-term enemies.
>> ltlee1 wrote: >>> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/b9c0c852-56de-11de-9a1c-00144feabdc0.html >>> ------------------------- >>> When China Rules the World: The Rise of the Middle Kingdom and the End >>> of the Western World >>> By Martin Jacques >>> Allen Lane £30, 550 pages >>> FT Bookshop price £20 >>> Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, >>> more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the >>> age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds >>> little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic >>> progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular >>> – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: >>> “When China’s miracle goes phut”. >>> Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will >>> be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India >>> which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the >>> “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be >>> politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world. >>> We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s >>> GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an >>> almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. >>> These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can >>> be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen >>> to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power. >>> Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat >>> laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions >>> about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful >>> economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been >>> European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- >>> jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries >>> modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the >>> world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it >>> would be like if it was not,” he writes. >>> Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, >>> huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality >>> of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what >>> it is to be modern. >>> If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic >>> one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese >>> confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries >>> of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up >>> with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the >>> world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China >>> is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on >>> a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes. >>> China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he >>> argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. >>> He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed >>> the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict >>> that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, >>> about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet. >>> Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its >>> past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary >>> relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long >>> as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living >>> civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a >>> nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, >>> particularly when it comes to Taiwan. >>> Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values >>> will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying >>> values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories >>> and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and >>> history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there >>> is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield. >>> That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that >>> emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate >>> themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in >>> culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses >>> the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, >>> that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag >>> than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far >>> the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for >>> community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for >>> stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian >>> culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition >>> not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. >>> These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean >>> advertisement for Asian values. >>> Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with >>> multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture >>> more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. >>> “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest >>> of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will >>> confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In >>> what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China >>> as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to >>> other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken >>> it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe >>> feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least >>> postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan. >>> In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural >>> rather than a militaristic nature.
> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the pages > do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder Veriah. Do a > search. Here's one a sympathetic website: http://www.harinderveriah.com/ > Though this project was conceived before his wife died from epilepsy > allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER department, and I haven't read his > book, I can't imagine if it doesn't somehow color (no pun intended) > everything else after.
> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>> By Martin Jacques >> Allen Lane £30, 550 pages >> FT Bookshop price £20
>> Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, >> more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the >> age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds >> little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic >> progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular >> – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: >> “When China’s miracle goes phut”.
>> Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will >> be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India >> which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the >> “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be >> politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
>> We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s >> GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an >> almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. >> These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can >> be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen >> to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
>> Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat >> laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions >> about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful >> economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been >> European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- >> jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries >> modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the >> world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it >> would be like if it was not,” he writes.
>> Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, >> huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality >> of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what >> it is to be modern.
>> If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic >> one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese >> confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries >> of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up >> with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the >> world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China >> is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on >> a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.
>> China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he >> argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. >> He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed >> the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict >> that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, >> about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
>> Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its >> past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary >> relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long >> as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living >> civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a >> nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, >> particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
>> Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values >> will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying >> values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories >> and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and >> history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there >> is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
>> That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that >> emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate >> themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in >> culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses >> the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, >> that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag >> than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far >> the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for >> community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for >> stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian >> culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition >> not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. >> These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean >> advertisement for Asian values.
>> Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with >> multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture >> more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. >> “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest >> of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will >> confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In >> what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China >> as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to >> other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken >> it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe >> feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least >> postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
>> In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural >> rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the >> centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and >> racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is >> more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about >> competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world >> power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- >> way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions >> circulate of what it means to be modern.
>> In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study >> Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn >> from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business >> practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans >> may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. >> It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and >> culturally layered than recreated in China’s image. That is the whole >> point: China will not rule the world.
>> David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT’s Asia edition
PRC is just a puppet to Russian. it is Russian who had the intention to conquer the world. every time, when China-land is overcame by none-chinese, it is a nightmare to the world, such as Qing Dynasty, Yuan Dynasty, now Russian Dynasty.
>>Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >>familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >>it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the pages >>do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder Veriah. Do a >>search. Here's one a sympathetic website: http://www.harinderveriah.com/ >>Though this project was conceived before his wife died from epilepsy >>allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER department, and I haven't read his >>book, I can't imagine if it doesn't somehow color (no pun intended) >>everything else after.
>>I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>>>By Martin Jacques >>>Allen Lane 30, 550 pages >>>FT Bookshop price 20
>>>Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by f . Now, >>>more often, they are preceded by the assumptive hen . Such is the >>>age we live in. Martin Jacques 550-pager on the ascent of China finds >>>little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic >>>progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular >>> and perfectly plausible premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: >>>hen China miracle goes phut .
>>>Jacques book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will >>>be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India >>>which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the >>>erciless measure of gross domestic product, China will be >>>politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
>>>We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China >>>GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an >>>almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. >>>These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can >>>be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen >>>to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
>>>Jacques thesis argued clearly and logically, if somewhat >>>laboriously is that China rise will overturn estern assumptions >>>about what it is to be modern. To date, the world only successful >>>economies of any size with the exception of Japan have been >>>European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- >>>jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries >>>modernise they take on western characteristics. e are so used to the >>>world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it >>>would be like if it was not, he writes.
>>>Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China continental size, >>>huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality >>>of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what >>>it is to be modern.
>>>If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic >>>one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese >>>confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries >>>of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up >>>with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the >>>world pre-eminent civilisation. s the dominant global power, China >>>is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on >>>a combination of racial and cultural attitudes, he writes.
>>>China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he >>>argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. >>>He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed >>>the world, if the resent regime continues for some time, a verdict >>>that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, >>>about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
>>>Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its >>>past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary >>>relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long >>>as they pay cultural obeisance. China idea of itself as a living >>>civilisation what he calls a ivilization-state as opposed to a >>>nation-state means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, >>>particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
>>>Jacques overriding point is that, in future, he debate over values >>>will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying >>>values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories >>>and cultures . His contention is that, since China culture and >>>history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there >>>is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
>>>That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that >>>emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate >>>themselves in America image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in >>>culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation destiny. He dismisses >>>the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, >>>that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag >>>than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far >>>the other way. He overemphasises Asia cultural predilections for >>>community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for >>>stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian >>>culture, he writes, he individual finds affirmation and recognition >>>not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group . >>>These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean >>>advertisement for Asian values.
>>>Jacques writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with >>>multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture >>>more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. >>>he fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest >>>of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will >>>confront the rest of the world with a serious problem, he writes. In >>>what he describes as the iddle Kingdom mentality , he presents China >>>as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to >>>other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken >>>it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe >>>feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least >>>postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
>>>In China rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural >>>rather than a militaristic nature. China view of itself as the >>>centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a rofound cultural and >>>racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image . But Jacques is >>>more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about >>>competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world >>>power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- >>>way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions >>>circulate of what it means to be modern.
>>>In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study >>>Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn >>>from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business >>>practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans >>>may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. >>>It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and >>>culturally layered than recreated in China image. That is the whole >>>point: China will not rule the world.
>>>David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT Asia edition
On Oct 23, 3:47 am, "Zainal Hisham" <Zainal His...@tmnet.net.my> wrote:
> China has intention to rule the world
I don't believe China has intention to rule the world. However, given China's large population, China, as well as India, will need to manage the world in order to provide a high standard of living to all of its citizens. Western world get wealthy by exploiting the world over. All those talks on western democracy bring wealth are western propaganda. They got rich by continental wide genocide and world wide exploitation long before they had turned democratic. China and India certainly could not do that. They have to benefit the world in order to benefit themselves.
> > Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > > familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > > it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the pages > > do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder Veriah. Do a > > search. Here's one a sympathetic website:http://www.harinderveriah.com/ > > Though this project was conceived before his wife died from epilepsy > > allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER department, and I haven't read his > > book, I can't imagine if it doesn't somehow color (no pun intended) > > everything else after.
> > I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> >> By Martin Jacques > >> Allen Lane £30, 550 pages > >> FT Bookshop price £20
> >> Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, > >> more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the > >> age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds > >> little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic > >> progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular > >> – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: > >> “When China’s miracle goes phut”.
> >> Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will > >> be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India > >> which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the > >> “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be > >> politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
> >> We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s > >> GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an > >> almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. > >> These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can > >> be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen > >> to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
> >> Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat > >> laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions > >> about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful > >> economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been > >> European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- > >> jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries > >> modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the > >> world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it > >> would be like if it was not,” he writes.
> >> Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, > >> huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality > >> of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what > >> it is to be modern.
> >> If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic > >> one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese > >> confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries > >> of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up > >> with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the > >> world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China > >> is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on > >> a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.
> >> China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he > >> argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. > >> He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed > >> the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict > >> that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, > >> about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
> >> Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its > >> past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary > >> relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long > >> as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living > >> civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a > >> nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, > >> particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
> >> Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values > >> will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying > >> values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories > >> and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and > >> history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there > >> is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
> >> That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that > >> emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate > >> themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in > >> culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses > >> the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, > >> that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag > >> than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far > >> the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for > >> community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for > >> stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian > >> culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition > >> not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. > >> These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean > >> advertisement for Asian values.
> >> Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with > >> multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture > >> more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. > >> “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest > >> of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will > >> confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In > >> what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China > >> as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to > >> other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken > >> it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe > >> feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least > >> postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
> >> In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > >> rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > >> centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and > >> racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > >> more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about > >> competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world > >> power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- > >> way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions > >> circulate of what it means to be modern.
> >> In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study > >> Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn > >> from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business > >> practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans > >> may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. > >> It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and > >> culturally layered than recreated in China’s image. That is the whole > >> point: China will not rule the world.
> >> David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT’s Asia edition
> >> ---------------------------- Hide quoted text -
> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the > pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder > Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website:http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before > his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER > department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't > somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> > By Martin Jacques > > Allen Lane £30, 550 pages > > FT Bookshop price £20
> > Books about China ruling the world used to be prefaced by “if”. Now, > > more often, they are preceded by the assumptive “when”. Such is the > > age we live in. Martin Jacques’ 550-pager on the ascent of China finds > > little space to consider the question of whether its rapid economic > > progress is unstoppable. It ignores almost entirely the other popular > > – and perfectly plausible – premise for books on the Middle Kingdom: > > “When China’s miracle goes phut”.
> > Jacques’ book is based on the extrapolation that, by 2050, China will > > be the biggest economy in the world, surpassing the US and India > > which, by then, will be third. By virtue of what Jacques calls the > > “merciless measure” of gross domestic product, China will be > > politically and militarily the most powerful country in the world.
> > We might argue about these two central premises, namely that China’s > > GDP will inevitably surpass that of the US, and that there is an > > almost mechanical relationship between economic output and power. > > These are legitimate points of debate for other books. Yet Jacques can > > be forgiven for making this leap of faith and asking what will happen > > to the world if, indeed, China becomes a dominant power.
> > Jacques’ thesis – argued clearly and logically, if somewhat > > laboriously – is that China’s rise will overturn “western” assumptions > > about what it is to be modern. To date, the world’s only successful > > economies of any size – with the exception of Japan – have been > > European or, in the case of the US, of European pedigree. The knee- > > jerk assumption of globalisation, he argues, is that as countries > > modernise they take on western characteristics. “We are so used to the > > world being western, even American, that we have little idea what it > > would be like if it was not,” he writes.
> > Jacques contends, not unreasonably, that China’s continental size, > > huge population, racial homogeneity and confidence in the centrality > > of its own civilisation make for a country capable of redefining what > > it is to be modern.
> > If Britain was a maritime hegemon and the US an airborne and economic > > one, then China will be a cultural one, he predicts. As Chinese > > confidence grows apace with its decisive emergence from two centuries > > of humiliation, its overriding attitude will not be one of catching up > > with the west, but rather of regaining its rightful place as the > > world’s pre-eminent civilisation. “As the dominant global power, China > > is likely to have a strongly hierarchical view of the world, based on > > a combination of racial and cultural attitudes,” he writes.
> > China will draw on its Confucian roots, a paternalistic ethos that, he > > argues, is not readily compatible with western democratic principles. > > He goes so far as to suggest that it would be best for China, indeed > > the world, if the “present regime continues” for some time, a verdict > > that this former editor of Marxism Today might not have advanced, say, > > about the Chile of Augusto Pinochet.
> > Much of the future Jacques foresees for China can be found in its > > past. He expects it to reassert elements of its ancient tributary > > relationship with neighbouring countries, leaving them alone so long > > as they pay cultural obeisance. China’s idea of itself as a living > > civilisation – what he calls a “civilization-state” as opposed to a > > nation-state – means it will never yield to assaults on its unity, > > particularly when it comes to Taiwan.
> > Jacques’ overriding point is that, in future, “the debate over values > > will be rooted in culture rather than ideology, since the underlying > > values of a society are primarily the outcome of distinctive histories > > and cultures”. His contention is that, since China’s culture and > > history are so formidable, it will not bend to western norms. If there > > is any bending to be done, it is the west that must yield.
> > That makes the book a useful corrective to those who assume that > > emerging superpowers, principal among them China, will recreate > > themselves in America’s image. Yet Jacques puts too much faith in > > culture as the ultimate arbiter of a nation’s destiny. He dismisses > > the argument of Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong, > > that the divide between east and west is more a question of time lag > > than intrinsic cultural difference. But in doing so, he goes too far > > the other way. He overemphasises Asia’s cultural predilections for > > community over individual, for social relationships over law, and for > > stability over freedom. In both south-east and north-east Asian > > culture, he writes, “the individual finds affirmation and recognition > > not in their own individual identity but in being part of a group”. > > These are sweeping statements that, at worst, sound like a Singaporean > > advertisement for Asian values.
> > Jacques’ writing on racism is revealing. Contrasting China with > > multicultural America, he presents it as an inherently racist culture > > more or less incapable of summoning a multicultural view of the world. > > “The fact that the Chinese regard themselves as superior to the rest > > of the human race, and that this belief has a racial component, will > > confront the rest of the world with a serious problem,” he writes. In > > what he describes as the “Middle Kingdom mentality”, he presents China > > as uniquely conflicted in its simultaneous feeling of superiority to > > other cultures and its inferiority to westerners who have overtaken > > it. These conflicted attitudes, for example, are common, and describe > > feelings of frustration and national inheritance denied (or at least > > postponed) in countries as far apart as Argentina and Japan.
> > In China’s rise, Jacques tends to see menace, albeit of a cultural > > rather than a militaristic nature. China’s view of itself as the > > centre of civilisation will, he says, lead to a “profound cultural and > > racial reordering of the world in the Chinese image”. But Jacques is > > more on the right lines when, elsewhere in the book, he talks about > > competing modernities. If, as he expects, China emerges as a world > > power to challenge the US, then modernisation is likely to be a two- > > way street, even a multi-lane highway, on which different versions > > circulate of what it means to be modern.
> > In the future, Americans may indeed watch more Chinese films and study > > Mandarin. But, by the same token, the Chinese will continue to learn > > from the west as its wholesale import of western capital, business > > practice and technology demonstrates. Just as Europeans and Americans > > may read more Confucius, so the Chinese will study more Shakespeare. > > It sounds like fun. The world is more likely to become multi-polar and > > culturally layered than recreated in China’s image. That is the whole > > point: China will not rule the world.
> > David Pilling is the managing editor of the FT’s Asia edition
Free Tibet wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid > <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Free Tibet wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1
>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid >>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: >>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>>>> It makes you think. >>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did >>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public >>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial >>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and >>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. >>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the >>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply >>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle >>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese >>> civilization. >>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in >> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come >> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those >> still hanging 'round home?
> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would > anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese?
BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's incidentally called trade.
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Fri Oct 23 09:12:16 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Free Tibet wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:40:56 -0400, RichAsianKid > <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Free Tibet wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1
>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid >>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >>>>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >>>>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >>>>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >>>>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: >>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >>>>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >>>>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >>>>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>>>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>>>>>> It makes you think. >>>>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did >>>>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public >>>>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial >>>>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and >>>>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. >>>>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the >>>>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply >>>>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle >>>>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese >>>>> civilization. >>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
>>>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
>>>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in >>>> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come >>>> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those >>>> still hanging 'round home?
>>> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would >>> anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese? >> BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the >> King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's >> incidentally called trade.
> er.. no. It's called exploitation. Same as you do to your Hispanic > cleaner and cook.
Trade's exploitation? Hmmm, sounds like a page lifted out of Das Kapital. Thought you're once fighting the Chinese *Communist* Party?
Question stands. If they're so 'exploited', why do truckloads of them *still* go to Hong Kong *and* continue to return?
And if it's for the $, well, these greedy hordes have no excuse do they?
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Sun Oct 25 10:15:21 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Free Tibet wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:57:14 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > wrote:
>> Free Tibet wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1
>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:40:56 -0400, RichAsianKid >>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >>>>>>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >>>>>>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >>>>>>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >>>>>>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: >>>>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >>>>>>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >>>>>>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >>>>>>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>>>>>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>>>>>>>> It makes you think. >>>>>>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did >>>>>>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public >>>>>>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial >>>>>>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and >>>>>>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. >>>>>>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the >>>>>>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply >>>>>>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle >>>>>>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese >>>>>>> civilization. >>>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
>>>>>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
>>>>>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in >>>>>> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come >>>>>> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those >>>>>> still hanging 'round home?
>>>>> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would >>>>> anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese? >>>> BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the >>>> King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's >>>> incidentally called trade.
>>> er.. no. It's called exploitation. Same as you do to your Hispanic >>> cleaner and cook. >> Trade's exploitation? Hmmm, sounds like a page lifted out of Das >> Kapital. Thought you're once fighting the Chinese *Communist* Party?
>> Question stands. If they're so 'exploited', why do truckloads of them >> *still* go to Hong Kong *and* continue to return?
>> And if it's for the $, well, these greedy hordes have no excuse do they?
> What are you talking about "trade"?? Migrant workers aren't trade! Of course > there's the business model called the "slave trade" which is possibly what > you mean. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess your housekeeper > fits that business model. It's not hard to exploit migrant workers. Just grab > their passport and you've got them by the short and curlies. Work them for > whatever hours under whatever conditions and give them slightly more than > nothing. Trade! LOL That's the high I.Q. boy!
Well, trade whatever you call it is still a 2-way street. No Hong Kong'er or American will be able to employ them even if government-approved if they're not at least partially willing themselves. Put things one more time, if it's really so bad these workers even if low IQ have their option of staying home. Who are you to interfere with their freedom anyway?
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Mon Oct 26 09:34:17 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> Free Tibet wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1
> > On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:57:14 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > > wrote:
> >> Free Tibet wrote: > >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>> Hash: SHA1
> >>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:40:56 -0400, RichAsianKid > >>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Free Tibet wrote: > >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid > >>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: > >>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid > >>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > >>>>>>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > >>>>>>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the > >>>>>>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder > >>>>>>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: > >>>>>>>>http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before > >>>>>>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER > >>>>>>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't > >>>>>>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
> >>>>>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> >>>>>>>> It makes you think. > >>>>>>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did > >>>>>>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public > >>>>>>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial > >>>>>>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and > >>>>>>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. > >>>>>>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the > >>>>>>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply > >>>>>>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle > >>>>>>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese > >>>>>>> civilization. > >>>>>>>http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
> >>>>>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
> >>>>>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in > >>>>>> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come > >>>>>> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those > >>>>>> still hanging 'round home?
> >>>>> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would > >>>>> anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese? > >>>> BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the > >>>> King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's > >>>> incidentally called trade.
> >>> er.. no. It's called exploitation. Same as you do to your Hispanic > >>> cleaner and cook. > >> Trade's exploitation? Hmmm, sounds like a page lifted out of Das > >> Kapital. Thought you're once fighting the Chinese *Communist* Party?
> >> Question stands. If they're so 'exploited', why do truckloads of them > >> *still* go to Hong Kong *and* continue to return?
> >> And if it's for the $, well, these greedy hordes have no excuse do they?
> > What are you talking about "trade"?? Migrant workers aren't trade! Of course > > there's the business model called the "slave trade" which is possibly what > > you mean. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess your housekeeper > > fits that business model. It's not hard to exploit migrant workers. Just grab > > their passport and you've got them by the short and curlies. Work them for > > whatever hours under whatever conditions and give them slightly more than > > nothing. Trade! LOL That's the high I.Q. boy!
> Well, trade whatever you call it is still a 2-way street. No Hong > Kong'er or American will be able to employ them even if > government-approved if they're not at least partially willing > themselves. Put things one more time, if it's really so bad these > workers even if low IQ have their option of staying home. Who are you to > interfere with their freedom anyway?
> > ~~~ > > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > > Date: Mon Oct 26 09:34:17 2009 GMT > > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Free Tibet wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:52:46 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > wrote:
>> Free Tibet wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:57:14 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:40:56 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >>>>>>>>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >>>>>>>>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >>>>>>>>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >>>>>>>>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: >>>>>>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >>>>>>>>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >>>>>>>>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >>>>>>>>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>>>>>>>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>>>>>>>>>> It makes you think. >>>>>>>>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did >>>>>>>>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public >>>>>>>>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial >>>>>>>>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and >>>>>>>>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. >>>>>>>>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the >>>>>>>>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply >>>>>>>>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle >>>>>>>>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese >>>>>>>>> civilization. >>>>>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
>>>>>>>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
>>>>>>>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in >>>>>>>> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come >>>>>>>> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those >>>>>>>> still hanging 'round home?
>>>>>>> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would >>>>>>> anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese? >>>>>> BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the >>>>>> King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's >>>>>> incidentally called trade.
>>>>> er.. no. It's called exploitation. Same as you do to your Hispanic >>>>> cleaner and cook. >>>> Trade's exploitation? Hmmm, sounds like a page lifted out of Das >>>> Kapital. Thought you're once fighting the Chinese *Communist* Party?
>>>> Question stands. If they're so 'exploited', why do truckloads of them >>>> *still* go to Hong Kong *and* continue to return?
>>>> And if it's for the $, well, these greedy hordes have no excuse do they? >>> What are you talking about "trade"?? Migrant workers aren't trade! Of course >>> there's the business model called the "slave trade" which is possibly what >>> you mean. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess your housekeeper >>> fits that business model. It's not hard to exploit migrant workers. Just grab >>> their passport and you've got them by the short and curlies. Work them for >>> whatever hours under whatever conditions and give them slightly more than >>> nothing. Trade! LOL That's the high I.Q. boy!
>> Well, trade whatever you call it is still a 2-way street. No Hong >> Kong'er or American will be able to employ them even if >> government-approved if they're not at least partially willing >> themselves. Put things one more time, if it's really so bad these >> workers even if low IQ have their option of staying home. Who are you to >> interfere with their freedom anyway?
> I'm not interfering with their freedom. Why are you supporting harrasment of > foreign workers? Read your page again. You support the treatment of people > like that?
I'd let the market decide. That's btw what Americans call "freedom of association".
These Indonesians or Thais or whatever have the option of *not* leaving their country going to Hong Kong or wherever. And when they conciously choose to do so seeking to make a buck, they have to abide by the rules. Simple as that.
And in this domestic business relationship it is not the employee, but the employer, who comes first.
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Wed Oct 28 13:58:14 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:20:29 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > wrote:
> >Free Tibet wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1
> >> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:52:46 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > >> wrote:
> >>> Free Tibet wrote: > >>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:57:14 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> Free Tibet wrote: > >>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>>>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:40:56 -0400, RichAsianKid > >>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: > >>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid > >>>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >>>>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid > >>>>>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely > >>>>>>>>>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, > >>>>>>>>>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the > >>>>>>>>>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder > >>>>>>>>>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: > >>>>>>>>>>>http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before > >>>>>>>>>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER > >>>>>>>>>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't > >>>>>>>>>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
> >>>>>>>>>>> It makes you think. > >>>>>>>>>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did > >>>>>>>>>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public > >>>>>>>>>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial > >>>>>>>>>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and > >>>>>>>>>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. > >>>>>>>>>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the > >>>>>>>>>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply > >>>>>>>>>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle > >>>>>>>>>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese > >>>>>>>>>> civilization. > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
> >>>>>>>>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
> >>>>>>>>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in > >>>>>>>>> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come > >>>>>>>>> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those > >>>>>>>>> still hanging 'round home?
> >>>>>>>> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would > >>>>>>>> anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese? > >>>>>>> BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the > >>>>>>> King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's > >>>>>>> incidentally called trade.
> >>>>>> er.. no. It's called exploitation. Same as you do to your Hispanic > >>>>>> cleaner and cook. > >>>>> Trade's exploitation? Hmmm, sounds like a page lifted out of Das > >>>>> Kapital. Thought you're once fighting the Chinese *Communist* Party?
> >>>>> Question stands. If they're so 'exploited', why do truckloads of them > >>>>> *still* go to Hong Kong *and* continue to return?
> >>>>> And if it's for the $, well, these greedy hordes have no excuse do they? > >>>> What are you talking about "trade"?? Migrant workers aren't trade! Of course > >>>> there's the business model called the "slave trade" which is possibly what > >>>> you mean. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess your housekeeper > >>>> fits that business model. It's not hard to exploit migrant workers. Just grab > >>>> their passport and you've got them by the short and curlies. Work them for > >>>> whatever hours under whatever conditions and give them slightly more than > >>>> nothing. Trade! LOL That's the high I.Q. boy!
> >>> Well, trade whatever you call it is still a 2-way street. No Hong > >>> Kong'er or American will be able to employ them even if > >>> government-approved if they're not at least partially willing > >>> themselves. Put things one more time, if it's really so bad these > >>> workers even if low IQ have their option of staying home. Who are you to > >>> interfere with their freedom anyway?
> >> I'm not interfering with their freedom. Why are you supporting harrasment of > >> foreign workers? Read your page again. You support the treatment of people > >> like that?
> >I'd let the market decide. That's btw what Americans call "freedom of > >association".
> Really?
> Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other > individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common > interests.[1] The right to freedom of association has been included in a number > of national constitutions and human rights instruments, including the US > constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.
> Freedom of association in the sense of workers' right to organize and > collectively bargain is also recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human > Rights and International Labor Organization Conventions.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association
> Not quite letting the market decide, is it?
> >These Indonesians or Thais or whatever have the option of *not* leaving > >their country going to Hong Kong or wherever. And when they conciously > >choose to do so seeking to make a buck, they have to abide by the rules. > >Simple as that.
> Yes and certainly outside any worker protection under labor laws or human > rights.
> >And in this domestic business relationship it is not the employee, but > >the employer, who comes first.
> Of course. In exploitation, the employer ALWAYS comes first. I'm assuming you're > talking about YOUR domestic situation - your Hispanic housekeeper and such.
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Fri Oct 30 14:30:29 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Free Tibet wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:20:29 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> > wrote:
>> Free Tibet wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1
>>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:52:46 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:57:14 -0400, RichAsianKid <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> >>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:40:56 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:46 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Free Tibet wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:06:30 -0400, RichAsianKid >>>>>>>>>>> <RichAsian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ltlee1, was at a bookstore and came across this. It sounded vaguely >>>>>>>>>>>> familiar and then I recalled, ah, where did I see this, and guess what, >>>>>>>>>>>> it's from a newsgroup! I just couldn't believe it! Flipping thru the >>>>>>>>>>>> pages do you know who the book was dedicated to? His wife Harinder >>>>>>>>>>>> Veriah. Do a search. Here's one a sympathetic website: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/ Though this project was conceived before >>>>>>>>>>>> his wife died from epilepsy allegedly from racism some Hong Kong ER >>>>>>>>>>>> department, and I haven't read his book, I can't imagine if it doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>> somehow color (no pun intended) everything else after.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't have this extra bit of knowledge till today.
>>>>>>>>>>>> It makes you think. >>>>>>>>>>> He (the Hong Kong Government official) pointed out that Hong Kong did >>>>>>>>>>> not have parties of the far right nor did racial violence scar public >>>>>>>>>>> life, both of which were true. There is, however, widespread racial >>>>>>>>>>> violence in Hong Kong: it takes place in the privacy of the home and >>>>>>>>>>> is meted out to foreign maids, primarily Filipino and Indonesian. >>>>>>>>>>> Chinese racism is subtly different from white racism, reflecting the >>>>>>>>>>> different culture of the Chinese. It is also pervasive and deeply >>>>>>>>>>> rooted, going back hundreds if not thousands of years, to the Middle >>>>>>>>>>> Kingdom, and the belief in the innate superiority of Chinese >>>>>>>>>>> civilization. >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.harinderveriah.com/articles22.html
>>>>>>>>>>> Just ask the Tibetans.
>>>>>>>>>> Why then are Filipinoes or Indonesians or Thais so desperate to work in >>>>>>>>>> Hong Kong -- are they masochists desperate to be oppressed? And how come >>>>>>>>>> this pernicious pernicious 'racism' isn't powerful enough to drive those >>>>>>>>>> still hanging 'round home?
>>>>>>>>> Where's your I.Q., I.Q. Boy? They need the MONEY! Why else would >>>>>>>>> anyone put themselves under the power of the cruel Han Chinese? >>>>>>>> BINGO!! You just answered RAK's question thank you. When you take the >>>>>>>> King's money, you do the King's bidding. Simple as that. It's >>>>>>>> incidentally called trade.
>>>>>>> er.. no. It's called exploitation. Same as you do to your Hispanic >>>>>>> cleaner and cook. >>>>>> Trade's exploitation? Hmmm, sounds like a page lifted out of Das >>>>>> Kapital. Thought you're once fighting the Chinese *Communist* Party?
>>>>>> Question stands. If they're so 'exploited', why do truckloads of them >>>>>> *still* go to Hong Kong *and* continue to return?
>>>>>> And if it's for the $, well, these greedy hordes have no excuse do they? >>>>> What are you talking about "trade"?? Migrant workers aren't trade! Of course >>>>> there's the business model called the "slave trade" which is possibly what >>>>> you mean. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess your housekeeper >>>>> fits that business model. It's not hard to exploit migrant workers. Just grab >>>>> their passport and you've got them by the short and curlies. Work them for >>>>> whatever hours under whatever conditions and give them slightly more than >>>>> nothing. Trade! LOL That's the high I.Q. boy!
>>>> Well, trade whatever you call it is still a 2-way street. No Hong >>>> Kong'er or American will be able to employ them even if >>>> government-approved if they're not at least partially willing >>>> themselves. Put things one more time, if it's really so bad these >>>> workers even if low IQ have their option of staying home. Who are you to >>>> interfere with their freedom anyway? >>> I'm not interfering with their freedom. Why are you supporting harrasment of >>> foreign workers? Read your page again. You support the treatment of people >>> like that?
> Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other > individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common > interests.[1] The right to freedom of association has been included in a number > of national constitutions and human rights instruments, including the US > constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.
> Freedom of association in the sense of workers' right to organize and > collectively bargain is also recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human > Rights and International Labor Organization Conventions. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association
> Not quite letting the market decide, is it?
As my reply didn't show up, here RAK posts again:
But surely Free Tibet ain't no Filipino Maid? Is third party FT fighting *for* some "Flipper" ("fucking little island people" as they're called.... terrible American nick ain't it?) and in the process thwart that equilibrium process of freedom of association and self-assortment?
Or is FT desperate to join the maids, the workers, the proletariat.
>> These Indonesians or Thais or whatever have the option of *not* leaving >> their country going to Hong Kong or wherever. And when they conciously >> choose to do so seeking to make a buck, they have to abide by the rules. >> Simple as that.
> Yes and certainly outside any worker protection under labor laws or human > rights.
Third-party intervention? Hmmmm. Doesn't quite sound like freedom of association to me.
>> And in this domestic business relationship it is not the employee, but >> the employer, who comes first.
> Of course. In exploitation, the employer ALWAYS comes first. I'm assuming you're > talking about YOUR domestic situation - your Hispanic housekeeper and such.
"Exploitation"? See response under 1st paragraph.
Free Tibet, there's no such thing as "exploiter" or "exploited". There are only winners and losers.
> ~~~ > This PGP signature only certifies the sender and date of the message. > It implies no approval from the administrators of nym.mixmin.net. > Date: Fri Oct 30 14:30:29 2009 GMT > From: freeti...@nym.mixmin.net > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
|
