Let's Dialogue: Recent Posts

Let's Dialogue: Recent Posts http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ Let's Dialogue: Recent Posts en Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:23:46 +0000 Sandman89 on "Proposed topic from hargaw" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=12#post-28 Sun, 05 Oct 2008 20:07:07 +0000 Sandman89 28@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ The Central government cant be blamed. Its just the fault of the Dalai Lama ( or Duh Lie Lama, how hes being called by a lot of people^^). He shouldnt be so stary and finally accept, that Tibet belongs to China. The central government brought a lot of good things to Tibet, for example schools, hospitals, and the Chinese removed the slavery in Tibet. But as long as this is not being publsihed in the western medias..I think , the deadlock will be there for a longer time.. Sandman89 on "Behind Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=8#post-27 Sun, 05 Oct 2008 20:00:33 +0000 Sandman89 27@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ Well, the solution would be to take 2 views before you make a judgement. And you should take a closer look at the media ( for example the german "BILD-zeitung") Everything is being pushed -up in there. Like making an elephant out of a mosquito. ourvoice on "Public Donation for China's Quake-stricken People" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=18#post-26 Fri, 23 May 2008 16:23:07 +0000 ourvoice 26@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ <h4>Public Donation for China's Quake-stricken People</h4> <h5>Organizer: German-China Association Munich</h5> <h5>Place: Odeonsplatz, Munich, Germany</h5> <h5>Time: May 16th, 18:00 -- 22:00</h5> <h5>Donations Raised: 3162.76 Euros</h5> <h5>All the money raised will be channeled through German Red Cross to China Red Cross to help the people in urgent need.</h5> <h5>You can also make direct donation to China Red Cross via the following channel:</h5> <h5>Account: Red Cross Society of China</h5> <h5>Bank: Jiuxianqiao Branch, China CITIC Bank Beijing</h5> <h5>Foreign Currency Account No.: 7112 1114 8260 0000 209</h5> <h5>Swift Code: CIBKCNBJ100</h5> <h5>Telephone: 0086-10-64319780</h5> <h5>Website: <a href="http://www.redcross.org.cn">www.redcross.org.cn</a></h5> bolzano on "opinions of an average Chinese Student" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=13#post-21 Mon, 05 May 2008 14:04:43 +0000 bolzano 21@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ I think both East and West have the recognition that the Lack of Communication between two different cultures is going to be terrible Dangerous for everyone. For without understanding, the likelihood, for most of the judgements, &arguments, are going to be unwise and incongruous. Without comprehension they will be taken simply on paper and advice. But Acculturation is not Supersession. Mutual understanding means mutual compromise. The West shouldnot always understand the East in a western way. Let's discuss the problems of human rights. No phrase is bandied around more in the rebukes on China than "freedom of individual" and "human rights". Freedom yes, but which one? There is no Identic Form of freedom. There are western people believe in western freedom, and eastern people eastern freedom(That's why the US style freedom cannot run effectively in Iraq, ditto in Afghanistan. … ditto Yugoslavia. …, ditto the other places under the US invasions, bombings, overthrows, and miscellaneous war crimes spanning more than half a century). This arises very much from the different Cultural Backgrounds in which people generate their Views on Things, Persons and Events. Freedom, human rights and democracy are not something Pharisaism. They are something reflected in people's Daily Life. People are living in Happiness in the country, then it is a Country of the People, by the People, and for the People. Chinese people are now living in Happiness. In my point of view: Rapid growth of economy = Freedom. Living a better life = Human rights. Democratically elected government = Democracy. Happiness = Rapid grouth of economy + Living a better life + Democratically elected government = Freedom + Human rights + Democracy. Indeed, most of our Chinese people, for years and years they hoped they had had as many Western Friends and had received as many Western Visitors as almost any of hospitable westerns; and that westerners' pleasant experience in China, fortified by Chinese, was that it was enought in China being a Westerner to be received with the readiest respect and recognition anywhere. In the course of China's "peace rising", we are trying our best to meet the challenges come from the ever-expanding populations, increasing demands for energy and food, as well as the disparities in wealth, and so as to be sure of getting achievement for further development of Chinese-characterized Socialism which enables its people to living a better life in a harmonious environment and civil society. We are ready to embrace the people from all over the world as friends. China is a nation with an adequate legal system, not that perfect, though, even in the work of genius you may see defects, faults, &flaws. We all can witness a progressing China, and China has amply proved its democratic credentials. In fact, it could be argued that, the Communist Party, with great Chinese people and a new elected go-vern-ment, would demonstrate once and for all that China has escaped from the turbulent past to become a liberal, modern republic. A strong and confident China surely can do best to cope with whatever comes the way. But unfortunately, Chinese efforts of gaining western recognition seem to produce less obvious results. In the western world, the fact is: China for almost half a century has long been describing as something "different", by some of the evil forces and western mainstream medias, especially a handful of western juntos, diversionists, who for all the time hold a Hostile Attitude towards China and Chinese people, think and speak only of the contraties, distort the truths, and incite the riots, hatred and overthrows. Hance they are continually discontented themselves, and by their Remarks sour the Chinese on their doggery, offend officially and personally Chinese people, as well people all over the world, and make themselves everywhere disagreeable and unacceptable. It is amazing that some of the westerners and western medias, so arrogant as to suppose that in More Than 20 Years there as been no changes in China, and there is nothing need to know about China except "autarchy, poor, &the lack of human rights", and no particular impressions to correct when they first know China long time ago. Indeed, it would be a challenge to communicate with an activist -- especially, perhaps, like the mayor of parise, a Neoconservative man who awarded Dalailama the honourable citizenship -- without being amazed at the vast continent of his ignorance about China. Those Activists try every attempt to assert himself, snap others, and contradict every person. They confound the justice and patriotism with the nationalism, and think Chinese is too ignorant to know the problems of the alleged human rights. Heavens, They pretend to know China better than Chinese! The notion of a China being regarded in western world as a total "heretic" at all, of ever being thought of or spoken of in that manner, was so uncommonly incongruous and absurd to me. For some average westerners, I would say: you don't know China because the western world prevent you from knowing a real China, by what they did in the past and what they have done recently and what they are doing all the time. Let's quote the example of CNN. CNN is one of the authoritative medias, and Jack Cafferty is one of the senior news analysts. CNN and Jack Cafferty are not only represent their own viewpoints. Think about Jack Cafferty's abominable words which describe Chinese products and Chinese people as "junkes" and "thugs&goons". It would be a tragedy if the chinese people shirked their duty to get shrink of defending themselves while the famous commentators take every chance to humiliate the chinese people and chinese democratically elected government. CNN's behaviors are continually discontented chinese people, and Jack Cafferty's words disgust the Pleasures of the world, offend officially and personally many just People all over the World, include Americans and the US government, for americans and the US government are friends of china and chinese people. If Jack Cafferty's lurid word which conveys his mind was founded by prejudice, such poor Person would be the more to be pitied. the Disposition to criticese, be disgusted, and horsefeathers, is perhaps taken up originally by media distortion and ideological hostility, and is unawares grown into a Habit, which brings on real Griefs and Misfortunes. for as many are offended by, and nobody well loves this sort of person and this Sort of Media in which Caferty works. Under the circumstance, it is reasonable for the chinese, and people all over the world, to fulminat Cafferty and CNN for the Nazi arguments. The legitimate discontent of Chinese People is the reflection of patriotism, not the western alleged nationalism. If Cafferty himself and CNN can not change this bad habit and action, and condescend to a more justified world, without fretting Cafferty himself and CNN itself about their bad words and actions, it is good for others, especially chinese, to fulminat and denounce CNN, which is always disagreeable and whose commentators sometime very arbitrarily good at jump to words turning the truth upside down irresponsibly with his opinionated head. I therefore advise those Hostile Powers, &juntos &diversionists, or those activists or politicians whose wrongful deeds are perhaps taken up originally by Imitation or Misunderstanding which is unawares grown in to a bad Habit, which tho' at present strong may nevertheless be cured when those who have it are convinced of its bad Effects, that if they wish to be respected and beloved by others and happy in themselves they should Pay more attention to the Goodness and leave off fulminating others about their own business. Speaking Dalailama, his crocodilian tear, a hoodwinking, appears in face the multiplicity of forms, and lies hid under the variety of disguises; which like a Jesuit, show his luster appearance with his Shade veiled behind. Though he hide the shade from righteousness, the words and deeds have betrayed it to others. As the riots and violences in China have debunked his veil of brightness to expose his double-dealing nature. So please forget the Hollywood movies' and the western medias' descriptions about the Tibet as a Shangri-La image where there are blue sky, and crystal clear waters and green mountains, mysterious monks. Because it is impossible to paint that picture by using the brush of a slavery system. In Chinese people's mind, he's a slaveholder, liar, head of terrorist group, betrayer, diversionist and secessionist. Finally, I quote President John F.Kenedy's words to close my writing. In the communication of two different cultures, Mutual understanding and Mutual Compromise are important. So both sides should agree to disagree. "Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us." "Let's unite to heed in all corners of the earth the command of Isaiah - to "undo the heavy burdens..., let the oppressed to free." LetsDialogue on "Proposed topic from hargaw" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=12#post-20 Mon, 05 May 2008 10:12:29 +0000 LetsDialogue 20@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ Proposed topic from hargaw: Since the early 80's, when Deng Xiao Ping announced that China would like to discuss with Dalai on condition that he stopped his independence claim to Tibet, there were so many rounds of discussion between Dalai delegates and the central govt. Still the discussions are going on and nobody sees any breakthrough to such deadlock. In 1988, Dalai announced his famous middle of the road approach to Tibet policy, instead of fully independence, he asked for full autonomy of the Tibetan people, which was concluded as Strasbourg Statement. He insisted a so call Great Tibet Region to include all the regions in China which have Tibetan residence. In order to pursue his Great Tibetan plan, he insisted this region is only for the Tibetans and the central govt should not station any army in order to respect his autonomous plan. This Great Tibet region will cover about 1/4 of the land space of the whole country from currently 1/8, (according to Chinese administration, the Tibet Autonomous Region, TAR) or to double the land space. TAR has a moment 95% of Tibetans in residence but the extended region is just the reversed. Tibetans are only 5% to the rest of the race groups. If all Tibetans are adding together, there are about 6 million in China. What does it mean to China or to the whole world when Dalai’s Great Tibetan Region is to be realised? First China will lose 1/4 of the land space as it will be an out-of-control land to the Chinese army and the central govt. According to the Chinese history, it never happened before. Second, it will be a massive ethnic cleansing of more than 50 million people of different race groups in order to leave space to the “noble class” race of Tibetans. Please note the rest regions are actually never controlled or ruled by the Tibetans in history and the other race groups have been living there for several centuries. Without any doubt, such “give away” will lead to strong bounce back from other race groups and civil war is to be foreseen, which at the end the victims are the Tibetan brothers, as other race groups will attack them for sure. If civil war is to be happening in China, the battle ground will be confined to China soil, but the people may escape and then fled to other countries. Imagine one million of such refugee kind (one million as compared to total 1’400 million, is almost nothing) will be a hazard to the western society. Any responsible govt will definitely CANNOT accept such “give away” proposal to avoid the disaster to the country itself and to the rest of the world. That’s why the talks have been carried on for years and certainly there will never be any progress. Can we blame the central govt for the negotiation deadlock with Dalai? Allen Yu on "A letter from Cornell" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-19 Sat, 26 Apr 2008 20:00:42 +0000 Allen Yu 19@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ I was born Taiwanese (family has been in Taiwan for over 300 years) - but we were incensed too with the Western attitude toward China v. Dalai. LetsDialogue on "This site should be a venue for critique of both "sides"" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=10#post-18 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:48:20 +0000 LetsDialogue 18@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ Thanks for your suggestion! First of all, we would like to precisely position our website that this new platform is dedicated to facilitating the dialogue between East and West, instead of criticizing the Western media. The reason we apply a new domain: <a href="http://www.LetsDialogue.com" rel="nofollow">www.LetsDialogue.com</a> is just to distinguish the new platform from the former protest and website and to show our clear stance for constructive dialogue. As we explain in our email to many friends: "Protests make ourselves heard, but only dialogue leads to mutual understanding. We are committed to driving the course." What's more, if you go through all the news items carried on the website so far, you will see there are few contents criticizing the Western media. What we have observed recently is that the Western media are adjusting themselves, even though slightly, on the Tibet issue. And we do find more and more objective Western reports, which voice their opinions on a fact-based manner. However, such voices are still minimal compared to the high rhetoric of the mass media. Therefore, we collect these shadowed but fact-based perspectives and present them to our readers on this platform. With such a counterbalanced approach, we believe our readers will gain an overall picture and make their own reasonable judgment. Besides, instead of purely focusing on the Tibet issue, we have selected more topics closely related to China as well as some hot topics in the world. We hope this would help to promote mutual understanding on a broader base. We hope the explanations above could answer your question. Thanks for your kind support and looking forward to more your advice! Dylan on "A letter from Cornell" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-17 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:07:07 +0000 Dylan 17@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ Dear Third Tone Devil, Thanks for posting this letter from Cornell University. What interests me most is the following comment: "The response of Chinese people both in China and here to the Tibet issue seems to be amazingly uniform, nationalistic and even fanatic. Maybe it's some cultural inheritance from the Red Guards, or some cultural inheritance from whatever permitted the Red Guards to arise The anti-Tibet sentiments and demonstrations here and in China strike me as spontaneous and genuine." I think the author is right in pointing out that Chinese people's response to the Tibet issue is "uniform", "spontaneous" and "genuine". But to attribute it to "the cultural inheritance from the Red Guards or some cultural inheritance from whatever permitted the Red Guards" shows the West's typical misperception of Chinese culture. To put it simple, it is the long tradition of patriotism that drives Chinese people's uniform and spontaneous actions. Patriotism is the love for the country, while the phenomenon of Red Guards roots in the worship of Mao Zedong. Therefore, there is a clear logic mistake to mix them up. When discussing the Chinese people's patriotism, the West usually links it to Nationalism. Such a confusion, on purpose or not, leads to misunderstanding and even demonization of China. Following are the definitions I find on the Merriam-Webster online dictionary. I guess our US friends won’t question the political stance of Merriam-Webster dictionary:-): -- Patriotism: love for or devotion to one's country -- Nationalism: loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially: a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups It is easy to see from these definitions that the key difference between “patriotism” and “nationalism” lies in the attitude towards other nations and cultures. I don’t want to resort to China’s long history to provide evidences on the tolerance of Chinese culture towards others, as our US friends are not as familiar with the Chinese history as the Chinese people know about US history (I guess this is already a good proof of the Chinese people’s openness:-)) I just want to take Thomas L. Friedman’s points in his bestseller book “The World is Flat” as a reference. I hope our US friends are familiar with this book which provides the US people and government with valuable advices on how to keep their cutting edge in the era of Internet and globalization. In the chapter of “The Virgin of Guadalupe”, Friedman points out incisively that a culture which is open and tolerant to others as well as having a strong cohesion for its own people is one of the key factors for a country’s success in the age of globalization. He also attributes China’s amazing development to such cultural factors by citing solid facts and figures. I guess this is one of the best proofs to distinguish the Chinese patriotism from the so called fanatic nationalism. Nice weekend! Third Tone Devil on "A letter from Cornell" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=11#post-16 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:45:56 +0000 Third Tone Devil 16@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ A friend who teaches at Cornell University sent the following email: "The adventures of the torch would be delightful, were it not for the sinister stuff going on in the background. A teacher at Cornell in the department that houses Chinese Studies screened a movie on Tibet here. Her promotional flyer quoted someone saying, "Tibet is a tragic country." The result was that a death threat to her and innumerable vicious remarks about her appeared on the listserve of our Chinese student association. One of her Chinese colleagues said OF COURSE a death threat was unacceptable, but NEVERTHELESS one had to understand that the issue inspired intense feelings. . . Then the professor herself said she didn't feel threatened and the problem was that people in the U.S. define "country" differently from the Chinese. I'm sure she feels threatened, but was downplaying the situation to avoid a major scandal. Why? Cornell's Chinese studies faculty are deep in bed with China through study-abroad and exchange programs. (We even have one in LAW.) At Duke University, when a Chinese-born student tried to mediate between a pro-Tibet and anti-Tibet demonstration, she got roughed up. Then someone put all her personal identification information on the Web, as well as the home address of her parents in China. They have since gone into hiding. The response of Chinese people both in China and here to the Tibet issue seems to be amazingly uniform, nationalistic and even fanatic. Maybe it's some cultural inheritance from the Red Guards, or some cultural inheritance from whatever permitted the Red Guards to arise The anti-Tibet sentiments and demonstrations here and in China strike me as spontaneous and genuine. Of course, the government will stifle them when it becomes convenient. . . Tibet is a boutique issue here, partly because Hollywood has taken it up and everyone loves the Dalai Lama. A lot of students are passionate about Tibet. What's charming is that they protest about China vs. Tibet but never say a thing about human rights in China proper. Ditto, for the people protesting about Darfur. I think they're actually ignorant about the larger human rights problem. Incredible, but probably true." I think she is overestimating the seriousness of the death threats -- this is a lot more common on the Chinese Internet than on the English one, as is, unfortunately, the disclosure of personal details that develop into online "hunts". Nonetheless, such cases will -- and should -- eventually become public, and they will do enormous damage to the credibility of Chinese viewpoints. So it would be good if Chinese netters offered their opinions. Third Tone Devil on "This site should be a venue for critique of both "sides"" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=10#post-15 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:22:49 +0000 Third Tone Devil 15@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ I am very glad that this site has been set up, and I hope that it will indeed generate dialogue. I have a few suggestions: First of all, I think it's good that the site has so far focused on the media question. Chinese demonstrations around the globe have conflated protests against specific instances of inaccurate (or, if you like, biased) reporting, which could find sympathy among the general Western public with protests against Tibetan separatism, for which it will be much harder to generate sympathy, especially if they are carried out in the way they have been. Yet ultimately, the dialogue has to encompass to the fundamental problems of different perceptions of history and the broader background of the events in Tibet. Just as the issue of Palestinian or Kurdish terrorism cannot be discussed without the context in which it is generated, so the issue of Tibetan protests and riots, and the no doubt excessive appeal of the romanticised image of Tibetan monasticism, cannot ultimately be discussed without the context of just what it is that has been happening in Tibet in the past fifty years, and how it has been perceived by people in Tibet. Unfortunately, at the moment I am convinced that the current wave of protests are not doing anything to further dialogue (as the email launch of this site observed). The ones in Germany are an exception, because the first one did indeed focus on media bias, and did so using the right words, which can appeal to Western sensibilities (to generalise rather crudely). I was concerned that Chinese flags appeared at later demonstrations, while there had been absent in Munich. It is not good to mix nationalism into a protest about media bias. But the protests that really worry me greatly are the ones such as the one in Australia, where Chinese students were, predictably, seen as seeking to stifle opposing voices, rather than to engage in a dialogue. For those of us who are trying to convince the world that Chinese people do not all speak in the same voice (i.e. that they are not all brainwashed zombies), these protests will make it much more difficult. So I think that the credibility of this site, and the cause it is championing, would greatly benefit if it focused not only on criticising Western media, but would allow even-handed criticism of Chinese media as well. silvia on "mutual understanding is possible" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=9#post-14 Thu, 24 Apr 2008 21:47:28 +0000 silvia 14@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ beyond on "Behind Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=8#post-13 Wed, 23 Apr 2008 03:10:09 +0000 beyond 13@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ Psychological warfare LetsDialogue on "Behind Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=8#post-12 Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:12:34 +0000 LetsDialogue 12@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ The New York Times published a lengthy <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?pagewanted=1">investigation</a> on April 20th, revealing how the US Defense Department used retired senior military officers working as television "media analysts" to gain and maintain public support for the Iraq war. As the report put it: "Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration's wartime performance." This report has triggered intensive discussions and serious concerns about media manipulation through various channels. People just can't help asking: How can I judge in the future whether the media is trustworthy or not? It is exactly the question we would like to have your views. LetsDialogue on "Tibet and the (Mis-)representation of Cultural Genocide" http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/topic.php?id=4#post-4 Sun, 20 Apr 2008 18:21:28 +0000 LetsDialogue 4@http://www.letsdialogue.com/bbpress/ <h2>Host: <a href="http://www.sosc.ust.hk/faculty/detail/sautman.html" target="_blank">Barry Sautman, Hong Kong University of Science & Technology</a></h2> Essay: Tibet and the (Mis-)representation of Cultural Genocide <a href="http://www.letsdialogue.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/CulturalGenocide-Tibet2.pdf" target="_blank">PDF Download</a> exclusively authorized by the author <h2> Author's Summary: </h2> This essay analyzes the émigré claim that China is directly or indirectly extirpating Tibetan culture. An overview is presented of the state of culture in Tibet, with elaborate discussions of religion, language, and the arts, the factors that feature in claims of cultural genocide made by Tibetan émigrés and their Western supporters. The essay concludes that the discourse of cultural genocide in Tibet is designed to mobilize people to support separatism, rather than serve as an intellectually meaningful conceptual framework for assessing China's policies in Tibet. The argument made is not that Tibet's cultural life is unproblematic, but that cultural change in Tibet is not especially oppressive when compared with cultural change affecting the rest of the developing world. Cultural change in Tibet is, for the most part, a result of the intrusion of Westernized modernity, mediated through China proper. The Han Chinese in Tibet are "conduits of western globalization," not transmitters of elements of traditional Chinese culture, such as Confucianism, folk arts, clothing, etc. The argument is not that this intrusion is generally positive, but that Tibetans are not subjected to a concerted, state-backed effort to destroy their culture. In all respects, the claim of cultural genocide in Tibet is misleading and inaccurate and creates an obstacle to a negotiated settlement of the Tibet Question. More works of Barry Sautman: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Genocide-Asian-State-Peripheries/dp/1403975744" target="_blank"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-69" title="97814039757442" src="http://www.letsdialogue.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/97814039757442.jpg" alt="" width="110" height="150" /></a> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Tibet-Politics-Development-Disputed/dp/0765613573/ref=tag_tdp_sv_edpp_i" target="_blank"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-70" title="51fyrxm773l_sl500_aa240_3" src="http://www.letsdialogue.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/51fyrxm773l_sl500_aa240_3.jpg" alt="" width="108" height="149" /></a>