The Best and the Worst of China

Comment in response to article

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle.asp?xfile=data/comment/2005/January/comment_January19.xml&section=comment


Hi,

I refer to the article "The best and the worst of China" by Mohammed A. R. Galadari published a day after the death of Zhao Ziyang, and the following passage:

“China lived as a totalitarian state under the iron grip of Mao Tse Tung and Deng Xiaoping for decades, to be followed by a period of feverish modernization and industrialization under Jiang Zemin, a process that is being carried forward by Hu Jintao today. Jiang Zemin not only opened up the economy but also introduced a certain amount of liberalism in the political functioning, raising hopes that China is changing for the better in terms of its human rights record.”

This passage implied that China's present day economic growth was started by Jiang Zemin which is totally inaccurate. Of all the key actors you noted above and Zhao Ziyang, present China owes Deng Xiaoping the most. Zhao Ziyang, Jiang Zemin & Hu Jin Tao are nothing but a legacy of Deng and is noted as such by most analysts. In fact, Deng hand picked these men himself.

Credit for China’s opening since the early 80s is commonly attibuted to Deng and this is plain to anyone with an understanding of the history of this man & his country. His faculties had clearly deteriorated by the time of Tiananmen, and he made a not so good decision which he might not have made if he was younger.

But we should also appreciate the considerations that Deng had & the context that he was in.

Noted for his practical skills and sharp mind, Deng went through one of the most challenging periods of his country's 6,000 year old history and was closely involved in it.

In that period of his country’s history, the most important events & decisions had implications of life and death for many hundreds of thousands of Chinese, and the welfare of the bigger group must be foremost on his mind.

Deng was a big picture man whose strategic objective was to develop the country he loved & for which he sacrificed almost his entire life & family (he joined politics when he was a teenager and many of his family members were killed by the Kuomintang).

To Deng, as long as his strategic objective was in line, other issues were subservient to it. To him 50 years is nothing.

To him China was ready to accept the humiliation of being poor and back ward but will strive for the day they made good on his hope.

To him, the fate of a billion fellow citizens was not to be decided by the demands of a few thousand young kids who had not yet done anything for their country.

To him bending to the demands of a few thousand people all the time (or interest groups in western democratic jargon), a country of a billion mouths to feed will not stand.

To him a few thousand sacrifices for the good of the other billion is a small price to pay.

Today, half a billion Chinese enjoy a standard of living none of their forefathers had seen for hundreds of years - something that "free-wheeling democratic" Russia or India are not able to do. It was largely due to Deng Xiaoping.

That was and will always be the context and scale of things that Deng and all Chinese leaders deal with.

That must also be the scale on which they should be judged.

xxx


The best and the worst of China
By Mohammed A. R. Galadari
19 January 2005

DEAR readers, China often evokes mixed feelings. On the positive side, its growth in the past few decades is amazing, while on the negative side, its human rights record is reckoned as being one of the worst. Can development be at the expense of people's rights, is a pertinent question.

That China has no serious intention to change its negative image in respect of freedom and rights is clear from the assertion by Beijing yesterday that it has no regrets over the 1989 crackdown at Tiananmen Square. It was widely seen as one of the worst uncivilized acts by a government in living memory, when hundreds, even thousands, of youths had been crushed to death by rolling tanks on that fateful night on June 3-4. That was the way the government responded to a peaceful campaign for democracy and freedom by students. Ousted party leader, Zaho Ziyang, who died a day ago, had put the blame for the crackdown squarely on Deng Xiaoping, the top leader of the time.

Beijing's position is that it would not change its stand that the 1989 crackdown was correct. "Over the past 15 years since the incident, China's development has proved that this final judgment is correct", is how it explains the logic behind its clearly dictatorial stand. The argument is also that China's focus is more on economic development, and less on political reforms.

I do not ignore the fact that, in recent times, there were some half-hearted attempts to build a new image for China. One was the release of a set of new edicts on religious affairs, saying it would help better protect religious freedom. It gave protection to religious freedom and stressed that no one should be discriminated against for his or her religious beliefs. But, those who looked closely at the new edicts didn't see any serious improvements on the existing regulations. Another move was to grant more freedom to the media, a small step forward from a somewhat non-existent state. It wants the media to open up; but open up to the extent that it exposed business corruption, not political corruption. Who doesn't know political corruption is at the root of all corruptions?

China lived as a totalitarian state under the iron grip of Mao Tse Tung and Deng Xiaoping for decades, to be followed by a period of feverish modernization and industrialization under Jiang Zemin, a process that is being carried forward by Hu Jintao today. Jiang Zemin not only opened up the economy but also introduced a certain amount of liberalism in the political functioning, raising hopes that China is changing for the better in terms of its human rights record. But, change in respect of human rights and freedom is painfully slow, as is evident from the government's ham-handed approach to the Falungong religious sect, or to the large number of cases of capital punishment that are meted out often on not-very-strong grounds.

In Hu's scheme of things, it is "people first". He has placed renewed emphasis on the uplift of rural population who number some 800 million. He has also pledged to rein in corruption, but insists that western-style democracy will be a "dead end" for his country. He is ready to allow elections, but within his own party, and does not envisage a multi-party system.

Dear readers, China is seen as a counter-weight to the United States, for the future. That is the way it is growing; that is the way it is building its economic clout, not to speak of its military muscle. But, it has reached a stage in development — some 300 million people, matching the size of the United States, are middle class there — in which it should sincerely and seriously uphold Hu's own slogan, "People first". It essentially means it must set aside its mechanisms that trample on human rights and individual freedom. China has a great civilizational past. It has to have a great future as well, especially in terms of human freedom and liberty, the ideals of the modern world.

The Wrath of the Idiots

Pls read report attached.
http://www.straitstimes.com.sg/sub/topstories/story/0,5562,294142,00.html?


According to some people 'Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them.' Whoever wrote that might have been thinking of places like Phuket. Clearly, the people that wrote such things are ignorant of the fact that the majority of the people that died in this disaster were poor and disadvantaged people living in villages in the poorest parts of Asia eeking out a living in the most honourable way I know of – hard work.

Further more, like our little critique in the Story of Nolah, a ‘Big Flood’ or in this case a ‘Big Wave’ is a rather crude and shot-gun approach to punish the immoral or the unjust given the limitless might often attached to the Gods by these idiots.

(Story of Nolah: http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2004_01_01_cckplanetblog_archive.html)

Such theories are what I call Idiot’s Theories. It is also proof that idiots also think alike – not only do great minds. So how do we tell the 2 groups apart? We do know that one group tends to enlighten and enrich, while the other tends to shock & awe us by doing the exact opposite.

I also wonder how come these idiots who call themselves ‘believers’ did not get any special instruction from the Gods (like our fella Nolah) to go save the good ones before the disaster struck. The fact that they were not ‘chosen’ to do such feats gives us reason to believe that they are not really in the Gods’ ‘good books’. Or may be the Gods did send them messages. Just that these people were just too stupid to be able to interpret those holy messages.

Either way, you believe the things these idiots say?

xxx


The wrath of god?

CAIRO - THE view that man provoked the quake with wanton behaviour was the subject of Friday sermons in Saudi Arabia and other religious commentaries.

'Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity,' one commentator said on an Islamist Web site, 'is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them.'

Mr Walid Tabtabai, a member of the Kuwaiti Parliament, said the earthquake was a message. 'We believe that what occurs in terms of disasters and afflictions is a test for believers and punishment for the unjust,' he wrote in a column in the newspaper Al Watan.

He was only one among clerics from all religions trying to make sense of Asia's tsunami disaster and its massive toll on humanity.

To many, the question uppermost on their minds was - How could God let this happen?

The earthquake and tsunami showed no favour. But whatever their religion, people throughout Asia's affected areas turned to their respective God to help them through the crisis. -- NEW YORK TIMES

We See Them Everywhere .....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-prisoners3jan03.story

A friend once told me that one key reason he adopted his 'new' religion was because people he knew who follow a particular book 'seem to turn out to be better'. I did not bother to say anything because of the following:

1. there were so many reported cases of paedophile by leaders of his religion. Apparently, 90% of places where such people 'practice' in the US is known to have such cases. Statistically, this cannot be considered normal or acceptable (for e.g. do you find 90% of homes in your neighbourhood where 'leaders' of the homes sexually abuse innocent kids under them?). It was obvious to me that my friend did not 'know' of such people.

2. People like me have met/heard of so much goodness around the world involving people of so many different followings that I see no statistical reason to believe that that particular book is any different from any other sources of human inspiration. The 'criminals' in the above report is one such inspiring example.....

xxx