[Roger604]

In all of Chinese history, there was never one war that it would have lost had the Chinese people been fully unified. Every single defeat had its genesis in lack of political will. People in one part of China simply didn't care what happened in another part of China.

The quintessential Chinese character is that they love to "mind their own business." Chinese think, "I mind my own business. Let other people in far off regions of China suffer and deal with those problems first. Until the dangers show up in my neighborhood, it is not my concern."


There are two conceptions of China:

1) Both a state and a civilization where the government guards all people and all people support the government in this duty

2) A civilization only and not a state where people are only concerned with their own family, their own extended family (clan) or their own locale. The central government is so distant psychologically that it may as well be a heavenly kingdom holding a mandate of heaven, or even as far away as the King of England (no difference).


A number of factors reinforce Chinese people's instinct toward the latter, which influence us even today:

1) Historically, Chinese people do not recognize foreign states. There is a civilized "center" composing of various locales and everything outside of that are desolate lands and nomadic people. So conflicts and struggles are between the locales themselves -- the feuds and hatred are against one's neighbors.

2) Confucianism teaches Chinese people to care chiefly about their clan. One's duty is to betray the nation / civilization (a vague concept) if this will be beneficial to the clan. In particular, everybody just wants to have a lot of sons to carry on the family name.

3) As China stepped in modernity in the late Qing dynasty, people stopped believing the Chinese traditional beliefs which included Confucianism, Taoism, ancestral worship and folk religions -- those were what united all Chinese culturally -- but people held on resolutely to the notion of paramount loyalty to the clan. The result is that people saw absolutely no common ground between themselves and other Chinese (it's just a label, meaningless) and their sole goal is to gather money to benefit their clan.


So what happens is that if a Chinese person was to choose between helping a fellow Chinese (outside of his locale) or helping a foreigner persecute that Chinese, he would surely choose the latter. Because he would think, "There is nothing in common between me and that other Chinese, but the foreign can give me money and then I can use that money to help my family!"

Eventually, even the rulers stopped seeing their subjects as "one of their own" and instead just want to get accumulate more money for themselves. The Empress Dowager understood her sole goal in life as milking more wealth from her subjects and accumulating them. Hopefully, she can move that wealth to a foreign country to enjoy it safely. To her, she has no more in common with her subjects than with foreign powers -- she is entirely neutral between them except that her subjects, being physically closer, are a greater threat.

The same thing with the KMT bourgeois. Their only goal is to accumulate wealth for their own clan, and then enjoy that wealth safely (perhaps in a foreign country). To the Sung Mei Ling sisters, their sole goal was to play the Americans and the suffering Chinese people off of each other so they can enjoy shopping sprees in America.


Today, this is how the insidious corruption works:

Mother says to son, "I've paid a lot of money for your education. Now you go to foreigners with a big smile on your face and do what they want you to do. Then you take the money and give it to me so I can enjoy my later years."

Mother says to daughter, "I've put in a lot of effort raising you. Now you go and marry as rich a person as you possibly can. If he is a foreigner, that's fine, as long as he's rich. If you need to sleep with many men in bars to find a rich one willing to marry you, that's okay too. If you need to get cosmetic surgery to help you do this, that's okay too. Just make sure you get me my money so I can enjoy my later years."

Harley, you talked about the mother with the bimbo daughter who married a black guy. Truth is, she is not upset because her daughter married a black guy. She is just disappointed that he doesn't have enough money. She would be very happy indeed if it was a white guy with money.

Under no circumstance does the mother possibly concern herself with China the nation or other Chinese people. To her, they exist only as a tool to accumulate money for the clan. Deep down, the root of China's problem is the clannishness of the people whose sole goal is to accumulate money to give to their elderly parents and give to their sons to pass down the family name. Because the quickest, dirtiest and most convenient way to get that money is of course to sell out or exploit other Chinese.


The polar opposite to the insidious corruption are the Chinese people who have loyalty to their ancestors way back, not just their parents. They call China "the ancestral land" (祖国). They recognize that these are the land given to them by their distant ancestors, which are not to be sold for money to give to their parents for their retirement. Yet, these patriots keep clashing against the other group who have vested interests in their clan.

Consider Yue Fei, one of the great patriots of Chinese history. The Song Dynasty was strong and powerful, but a weak ruler ascended the throne. He did something stupid and ended up getting captured by nomads. The nomads also captured the capital city, Kaifeng. A relative was then put on the throne as a replacement.

Yue Fei was a great general who led expeditions to recover Chinese lands. He defeated the nomads with his intellect and strength. But as he was about to recapture Kaifeng, the new emperor (advised by corrupt courtesans) kept calling him back and preventing him from finishing off the nomads. They feared that if he won, the original emperor would return to the throne and also disrupt vested interests of the courtesans. Eventually, the corrupt, clannish people used treachery to kill the great hero Yue Fei.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yue_Fei

Consider also, Mao Zedong, another great patriot. He lost his beloved first wife in the revolutionary struggle. He lost his firstborn son in Korea. He did not seek hereditary succession like Kim Il Song. He could have just stayed in Hunan and accumulated wealth to give his parents a good retirement but he did not. He is the hero of the Chinese civilization in its darkest period.

He understood that clannishness is China's greatest weakness. That's why people were encouraged to criticize their parents during the Cultural Revolution. The insidious corruption manifested itself as filial piety but is really a mask for selfishness and clannishness. Where is the piety to our ancestors who founded the great Yellow River civilization?


Chinese politics is a continuous struggle between those loyal to the clan and those loyal to the civilization. The so called Chinese propensity for "peace" is really not peace -- it is just ambivalence toward other Chinese people in far away regions. Instead these people just want to focus on competition with other Chinese in their locality to accumulate wealth for their parents and their sons. Even, today, this has corrupted many CCP officials who pull strings to put their children into high positions.

A true Chinese patriot sees things in terms of China's interests -- the interests of the Yellow River civilization -- and is willing to sacrifice giving his or her parents a wealthy retirement to advance the interests of all Chinese. This is what truly honors our ancestors.

What was the Korean War? The Korean War was a demonstration that the CCP, under Mao's leadership, could motivate otherwise ambivalent people to sacrifice the narrow interests of their clan to defend the Yellow River civilization. It is the exact polar opposite of what would have happened under the clannish leadership (KMT-era), which would have done nothing until the enemy already slaughtered and raped their way through half of China because nobody really cared... everybody so wonderfully "peaceful".

That is the true takeaway lesson -- understanding the fundamental difference between the Sino-Japanese War and the Korean War, and how it relates to the whole of the history of the Yellow River civilization.

[IchiNiSan]

The Yellow-river civilizations started off over 5000 years ago, and was unlike the Egyptians and other ancient civilizations absolutely succesfull in expanding their territories and population with not too much natural and other cultural barriers.

What we should not forget is that we can not use today's information technology to look back in history, in which the communication speed between people is at worse than sluggish speed compared to the modern age. When the Yan-Huang civilization was growing so succesfully from pre-Xia to Zhou eventually it came to a maximum size barrier because the ancient technology simply could not govern such a huge country system efficient and effectively enough and no confucius or laozi and the like teachings were "invented" yet to keep the people together.

What you saw was a break away of the common "Yan-Huang" common cultural background and the Zhou Dynasty was disintegrated into litterally hundreds of different mini-states with all of them developing a pretty much own sub-culture as diverse as and could rival the European countries. The only thing holding these Yan-Huang 子孙 together was their skin color and there so-called common mythological ancestor. These sub-culture caused by geographical distances and climates to some extend still have their legacies in today's China, in which each province and region within a province could be considered to have their own unique culture. Look at the language, some would call it Chinese dialects, but in fact these dialects are so far away from each other that it is nothing more than an own language, because of distances one whole civilization lining up from the same tribe could end up not understanding each other at all over time. This would not have happened if we had the same information technology as today.

The Autumn-Spring era and the evolved Warring States were actually when the "Chinese" technologies and philosopical teachings were in prime time. Competition brought forth the best of the whole group. The so-called core of the Yellow River civilization such as Confuciusm, Taoism, etc etc was all individually only practiced in some of those States. It was only when the First Emperor ended up uniting China again that the Yan-Huang descendants saw the value in living under one umbrella and some of the "better" of these teachings were being picked up to see what would be the most efficient and effective way to rule such a huge country.

However, the worst legacy of this short-lived Qin Dynasty is that it only promoted selfishness by killing all the scientific achievments of the previous non-unified periods and building a great wall to shell China from foreign barbarians, which unfortunately became embedded in many dynasty rulers to not look into the world and created a closed-minded mentality. No, it was the subsequent Han dynasty that brough forth of the greatest of those ancient Chinese teachings,and actually using Confuciusm, Lao zi and the like to govern the huge sized country and to bond the people together. There is a reason why we are calling ourselves Han Chinese, and in a lesser sense Tang people. This is because the Yellow River civilization values and culture were truely formed during these two immensely succesfully dynasties. IF only the later rulers would have learned more from Han's Wudi rather than the First Emperor, then maybe China would have been a more adventurous culture.

The following Song dynasty is considered to be one of the strongest among the many Chinese dynasties and is supposedly only failed because of unfortunate reasons. It is interesting how this dynasty is so often romantized by the later Chinese people,especially the all famous "patriotic hero" Yue Fei. Maybe it is because it shows such a huge dilemmatic contrast of supposedly to be in the height of cultural and technological achievements, but is the first "Han" people dynasty to be taken over by non-Hans. If Yue Fei was really so patriotic, he should have ignored all those golden medals and continued his campaigns. IMO, the romantized stories about Yue Fei has made the Chinese people weak, it only promoted to dream on to be the hero and the bravest of the class and not just be rebellious, revolutionary and get the job done once in a while. As paranoiid as I am, sometimes I even suspect Yue Fei to rather save face and feared for failing to absolutely defeat the Jins, and therefore listened and went back. "Face" is really one of the worst weakness of the Chinese culture. This is why Chinese people would not give more credits to Zhu Yuenzhang or Liu Ban, but make up mythical romantized legends about a failed figures like Yue Fei, Han Yu and Guan Yu. It is like the Chinese people love to hear romantized legends of failure stories, BUT never really learn why it actually failed. Are these parts of the Chinese culture? These are weaknesses we should have stopped centuries ago and give true credit to the real succesful Chinese historic figures, like Li Shimin and understand the true value in really getting the job done (by killing off any threats, even if it is his blood brother).

And actually the strongest dynasties of Chinese history is the two last dynasties, the Ming and Qing. What is unfortunate is that the Ming descendants of Zhu Yuenzhang would become so weak and reverted to the closed-minded foreign policies by not exploring and thinking how to benefits from the advanced naval achievements. And that the Qing was so afraid of the Han Chinese that development in weaponry technology actually almost halted causing the Europeans to pick up where we have left it and at the end become so much more advanced than us. This is exactly what China misses, a scientific culture in which information is freely shared among everyone, so one of this “everyone" could practice and continuous improve the science in whatever you want to, from technology to politics to economics. This all was kinda killed off in the Qin. If only the emperors were less afraid of being kicked out of the throne and be truly in promoting to upgrade the nations, then the industrial revolution would have started in China and not in Europe.

The so-called clannishness is actually more of an issue caused by the past few hundreds years, in which China is an extreme instable and uncertain place to live. There is NO certainty in any sense, like what the Chinese experienced in the relatively stable dynasties of Han, Tang, Song and Ming. It was like more back to the warring states period, only much worse with foreign influences and a dynasty which was like failing but not failing yet, new foreign ideas and foreign invaders and internal civil wars among fractions and landlords. Without ANY true standing out leader the Chinese started to look much more inward and eventually holding it out together in the smaller communities. Without this outstanding leader and an absence of a sharing scientific culture a certain so-called "clannishness" mentality was developed in which people became even more selfish and need to protect their own family first. After all, it is a collective memory and embedded into the Chinese to care about the family first.

On a side note is that the greatest thinkers, scientists and the like had always been people who did not need to worry what tonight's dinner would be. It makes a huge difference if you spend 15 hours a day to hope for a congee bowl to feed your family or spend that 15 hours in research.

Sun Yat-sen because of timing, charism and his ideologies emerged as the true only leader in which he managed to unite the Chinese people behind him to get out of the miseries in the late Qing. What is unfortunate is that he shared way too much Western ideas and influences. Materialism was really in the rise because of these Western ideologies. The KMT was deemed to fail even with all the backing from Foreign powers. Mao emerged and kinda started off the current Mao/Deng dynasty, in which the brilliant military strategist in the man Mao regained most of the lost grounds. He indeed tried to kill off the selfishness in the Chinese people because of his beliefs in Marx, but had to revert to Confucius and ancient Han/Tang cultural values to get the Chinese people behind him. Eventually he failed in that because of his wrong socio-economic policies in the Great Leap and Cultural Revolution. Simply because of the disastrious society he left behind. A society which caused by those disaster years saw NO future and therefore became even more selfish and would care more about themselves. No wonder, how would one dare to care about the world if they can not even feed themselves, let alone their kids. Or would want to invest in non-bloodline family related matters if each day they live in uncertainty? What would happen the next day or year, another Great Leap Forward or another Cultural Revolution? The Chinese diaspora was in her prime-time with many intelectuals and entrepeneurs fleeing China, and China is left with those who by nature is too afraid to make that adventurous and even more uncertain step.

Deng Xiaoping, the truely great leader, understood very well that China need a new direction, a direction in which people would see a future in China and help to build up this place. All uncertainties and instability should be forced down to give people a framework in which they really believe that IF you spend the right effort you can come out of the miseries and poverty. The first step would give the absolute feeling and perception to everyone that China is truely united and will go on as harmony. Then it would need to gain a momentum in which the Chinese people could shave off the Yellow Perils embarassments and black pages of the past 200-300 years, by becoming proud again to be Chinese. Then to fine-tune the whole nations in which clarity and certainty is a must, in which equality and same amount of chances are given to everyone as long as you spend the right effort in it. But this process should take 50-100 years and can not be too quick, that's why the Tiananmen is a neccesity at that time as it could ruin all the plans if the CCP gave in.

What was so wonderful about Deng Xiaoping was his TRUST and optimistic in the Chinese people and his sense for reality. Once he gave a directive to send as many students abroad as possible to learn from the West, there was one close to him very afraid telling him, "No they will never come back." Deng reacted calmly with "Even if there will 1 come back China would be a gain, and there will certainly 1 coming back, because they are Chinese." (not exact quotes, but something similar.). He understood well that deep down inside any educated scholars they will find their Chinese roots and understood way early on that we should learn and catch up first before we talk about Face and the other kinds of stuff. See, how many Overseas Chinese are coming back and many are coming back not only for economic reasons.

I would totally agree with Roger that the CCP is up to a huge challenge by connecting to the people. The Chinese people still have too much distrust for the government, which we have our good reasons for that. The Chinese people see a flourishing economy, but to some extend there is still always uncertainty in everyone's actions, because of the corruption, very often confusing, unclear Law & Regulations, protocols, too much ibvious propaganda by incapable officials and plainout ignorance among themselves. Materialism has grown much faster in this new period launched by Deng Xiaoping than remembering the roots of the Yellow-River civilization. And again, this is to some extend caused by the uncertainty provided by the current system.

What you notice right now is that because of Information technology and communication speed is as fast as instantly over distances of thousands of kilometers, that the Chinese people gets much faster and better informed. We are not in the medieval world anymore, and distances should not be an issue anymore. Also because of the strong hands of the CCP for once we are having a stable system. And because there is a huge group among us emerged out of poverty, a big portion of this group also actually pick up the Yan-Huang cultural legacies. Noted, many would still be the so-called "money-grubbing", but this does not mean that we are transitting into a phase in our development in which ancient Yellow values and ethics are starting to pick up. We are not living in the medieval era anymore, and no power can stop the information flow inside the country. the CCP understands this very well, and that's why the CCP is reforming and evolving herself as well to fit on the changing general consciounous, hence the Chongqing crackdown and the many promises of the latest NGC. The CCP also starts to show more trusts in that the Chinese people truely are patriotic and will be constructive in building up our country, and they understand they need to gain the trust from the people. Trust can be gained in the coming years, but the process to totally change and develop the Chinese mentality back from purely selfishness and materialism to a "improved" Yellow-River roots will be a matter of decades rather than years.

Yes, absolutely, "clanisshesness" is a huge issue and weakness for China, but it has her roots and reasons, and I believe that with the proper developments of Modern China in the Information Technology era this will be more and more diminished and eventually the Yan-Huang descandents will all be proudly and truely saying "I am Chinese.".

[Red Fox Ace]

Roger604, on Mar 14 2010, 10:05 AM, said:

Mother says to daughter, "I've put in a lot of effort raising you. Now you go and marry as rich a person as you possibly can. If he is a foreigner, that's fine, as long as he's rich. If you need to sleep with many men in bars to find a rich one willing to marry you, that's okay too. If you need to get cosmetic surgery to help you do this, that's okay too. Just make sure you get me my money so I can enjoy my later years."

I've never met any Chinese woman who said this to her daughter, and I highly doubt that you ever have, either, Roger.

[wdl76]

Roger604, on Mar 15 2010, 01:05 AM, said:

In all of Chinese history, there was never one war that it would have lost had the Chinese people been fully unified. Every single defeat had its genesis in lack of political will. People in one part of China simply didn't care what happened in another part of China.

The quintessential Chinese character is that they love to "mind their own business." Chinese think, "I mind my own business. Let other people in far off regions of China suffer and deal with those problems first. Until the dangers show up in my neighborhood, it is not my concern."


There are two conceptions of China:

1) Both a state and a civilization where the government guards all people and all people support the government in this duty

2) A civilization only and not a state where people are only concerned with their own family, their own extended family (clan) or their own locale. The central government is so distant psychologically that it may as well be a heavenly kingdom holding a mandate of heaven, or even as far away as the King of England (no difference).


A number of factors reinforce Chinese people's instinct toward the latter, which influence us even today:

1) Historically, Chinese people do not recognize foreign states. There is a civilized "center" composing of various locales and everything outside of that are desolate lands and nomadic people. So conflicts and struggles are between the locales themselves -- the feuds and hatred are against one's neighbors.

2) Confucianism teaches Chinese people to care chiefly about their clan. One's duty is to betray the nation / civilization (a vague concept) if this will be beneficial to the clan. In particular, everybody just wants to have a lot of sons to carry on the family name.

3) As China stepped in modernity in the late Qing dynasty, people stopped believing the Chinese traditional beliefs which included Confucianism, Taoism, ancestral worship and folk religions -- those were what united all Chinese culturally -- but people held on resolutely to the notion of paramount loyalty to the clan. The result is that people saw absolutely no common ground between themselves and other Chinese (it's just a label, meaningless) and their sole goal is to gather money to benefit their clan.


So what happens is that if a Chinese person was to choose between helping a fellow Chinese (outside of his locale) or helping a foreigner persecute that Chinese, he would surely choose the latter. Because he would think, "There is nothing in common between me and that other Chinese, but the foreign can give me money and then I can use that money to help my family!"

Eventually, even the rulers stopped seeing their subjects as "one of their own" and instead just want to get accumulate more money for themselves. The Empress Dowager understood her sole goal in life as milking more wealth from her subjects and accumulating them. Hopefully, she can move that wealth to a foreign country to enjoy it safely. To her, she has no more in common with her subjects than with foreign powers -- she is entirely neutral between them except that her subjects, being physically closer, are a greater threat.

The same thing with the KMT bourgeois. Their only goal is to accumulate wealth for their own clan, and then enjoy that wealth safely (perhaps in a foreign country). To the Sung Mei Ling sisters, their sole goal was to play the Americans and the suffering Chinese people off of each other so they can enjoy shopping sprees in America.


Today, this is how the insidious corruption works:

Mother says to son, "I've paid a lot of money for your education. Now you go to foreigners with a big smile on your face and do what they want you to do. Then you take the money and give it to me so I can enjoy my later years."

Mother says to daughter, "I've put in a lot of effort raising you. Now you go and marry as rich a person as you possibly can. If he is a foreigner, that's fine, as long as he's rich. If you need to sleep with many men in bars to find a rich one willing to marry you, that's okay too. If you need to get cosmetic surgery to help you do this, that's okay too. Just make sure you get me my money so I can enjoy my later years."

Harley, you talked about the mother with the bimbo daughter who married a black guy. Truth is, she is not upset because her daughter married a black guy. She is just disappointed that he doesn't have enough money. She would be very happy indeed if it was a white guy with money.

Under no circumstance does the mother possibly concern herself with China the nation or other Chinese people. To her, they exist only as a tool to accumulate money for the clan. Deep down, the root of China's problem is the clannishness of the people whose sole goal is to accumulate money to give to their elderly parents and give to their sons to pass down the family name. Because the quickest, dirtiest and most convenient way to get that money is of course to sell out or exploit other Chinese.


The polar opposite to the insidious corruption are the Chinese people who have loyalty to their ancestors way back, not just their parents. They call China "the ancestral land" (祖国). They recognize that these are the land given to them by their distant ancestors, which are not to be sold for money to give to their parents for their retirement. Yet, these patriots keep clashing against the other group who have vested interests in their clan.

Consider Yue Fei, one of the great patriots of Chinese history. The Song Dynasty was strong and powerful, but a weak ruler ascended the throne. He did something stupid and ended up getting captured by nomads. The nomads also captured the capital city, Kaifeng. A relative was then put on the throne as a replacement.

Yue Fei was a great general who led expeditions to recover Chinese lands. He defeated the nomads with his intellect and strength. But as he was about to recapture Kaifeng, the new emperor (advised by corrupt courtesans) kept calling him back and preventing him from finishing off the nomads. They feared that if he won, the original emperor would return to the throne and also disrupt vested interests of the courtesans. Eventually, the corrupt, clannish people used treachery to kill the great hero Yue Fei.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yue_Fei

Consider also, Mao Zedong, another great patriot. He lost his beloved first wife in the revolutionary struggle. He lost his firstborn son in Korea. He did not seek hereditary succession like Kim Il Song. He could have just stayed in Hunan and accumulated wealth to give his parents a good retirement but he did not. He is the hero of the Chinese civilization in its darkest period.

He understood that clannishness is China's greatest weakness. That's why people were encouraged to criticize their parents during the Cultural Revolution. The insidious corruption manifested itself as filial piety but is really a mask for selfishness and clannishness. Where is the piety to our ancestors who founded the great Yellow River civilization?


Chinese politics is a continuous struggle between those loyal to the clan and those loyal to the civilization. The so called Chinese propensity for "peace" is really not peace -- it is just ambivalence toward other Chinese people in far away regions. Instead these people just want to focus on competition with other Chinese in their locality to accumulate wealth for their parents and their sons. Even, today, this has corrupted many CCP officials who pull strings to put their children into high positions.

A true Chinese patriot sees things in terms of China's interests -- the interests of the Yellow River civilization -- and is willing to sacrifice giving his or her parents a wealthy retirement to advance the interests of all Chinese. This is what truly honors our ancestors.

What was the Korean War? The Korean War was a demonstration that the CCP, under Mao's leadership, could motivate otherwise ambivalent people to sacrifice the narrow interests of their clan to defend the Yellow River civilization. It is the exact polar opposite of what would have happened under the clannish leadership (KMT-era), which would have done nothing until the enemy already slaughtered and raped their way through half of China because nobody really cared... everybody so wonderfully "peaceful".

That is the true takeaway lesson -- understanding the fundamental difference between the Sino-Japanese War and the Korean War, and how it relates to the whole of the history of the Yellow River civilization.

Roger I will not deny that these things never happened, and will not deny that it is probably part of the Chinese culture. But what I would like to point out is that these things happened not only in Chinese civilisation, I dare to say it happened to most of the civilisation.

Civilisation evolve with the people, and what effects people's behaviour is education. Unfortunately education can act as a double edged sword for China.

As the people becomes more and more educated they will understand their rights and their obligations better.

I stress rights and obligations come hand in hand and not separately, I am not living in China and I will not assume anything but the best way would be is to ask the current generation on how they view themselves and how they view China. How nationalist and how learned they are.

You cannot make assumptions based on things that happened 100 years ago (or even more) as it is just not fair.

So probably I would like to ask an opinion of a real Chinese instead.


My questions are:

1. How do you view yourselves as Chinese
2. How do you view the outside world
3. What do you think of the outside world and how they treat China
4. Where do you think this country should be heading
5. How do you think we can achieve that

You speak out of true idealism and nationalism, I completely understand that but by doing so you seemed to shut yourself out from any other opinion(s) and reality?

Quote

QUOTE (Roger604 @ Mar 14 2010, 10:05 AM)
Mother says to daughter, "I've put in a lot of effort raising you. Now you go and marry as rich a person as you possibly can. If he is a foreigner, that's fine, as long as he's rich. If you need to sleep with many men in bars to find a rich one willing to marry you, that's okay too. If you need to get cosmetic surgery to help you do this, that's okay too. Just make sure you get me my money so I can enjoy my later years."


I've never met any Chinese woman who said this to her daughter, and I highly doubt that you ever have, either, Roger.

I don't deny this did and does not happen. I would agree that some people identify money = happyness.

But why is it people tends to try to fix the end product of the problem instead of the problem itselves?

My question to you based on your statement.

Is what is creating this problem and how do you solve it?

[IchiNiSan]

Red Fox Ace, on Mar 15 2010, 05:52 AM, said:

I've never met any Chinese woman who said this to her daughter, and I highly doubt that you ever have, either, Roger.

Basically, Roger is still living in a world in which it lacked the communication speed & IT and a strong power center to hold an oversized civilization together, the late Qing. He still believes that the modern China would act the same as we did when the Japs started to invade China, when actually it was the failing dynasty without a strong visonary leader and because of lack of information flow took years before the Chinese people grasped what was really going on. What he failed to and maybe just refused to understand is how this selfishness and sub-cultures were formed and developed, because of the instability, uncertainty and general poverty. Roger would rather believe this is only a problem for Chinese people, as if we are all born like this. This is actually nothing new and in each stage of destablizing periods after a relatively stable united floursihing period of development and growth as a civilization. This counts for the rest of the world like WDL says.

And unfortunately, although Roger has over-exagerated and a bit too extreme one-sided in only complaining without some tangible constructive proposals to find the right balance, these kinds of "clannisshness" indeed happen in China. And again driven by poverty, and now also because of envy for the superficial lifestyles these "rich developed" live, this income distribution gap has widen too much. So, to answer a question not directed to me, I would raise my hands and say "I think I have heard and seen Chinese mothers saying these kinds of stuff to their daughters", only wrapped in other packages, like "OUT of love for you and in your best interests and for the family, you should look up someone who can bring food on the table and has a future, or immediately bring you and us to the next level." I understand, this can be hard to believe for people not really seen poverty in its basic form. It is to me also still very hard to understand that people will kill for only 100 RMB (warning: over-exageration), because this 100 RMB can be a fortune in some places in the under-developed interior....

[Sampanviking]

Mothers the world over look at young guys that have good prospects and have the makings of a good provider and family man. Mothers the world over will communicate this to their daughters through comments such as "Oh I like him, he's a very nice young man". Most daughters however are usually happy having a good time and tend to like gentlemen with "Other Qualities" much to Mothers lasting despair.

In most cases, both youngsters will eventually "settle down" of their own accord and Mother can stop worrying.

[flyzies]

Roger, if you truly believe to the last word everything you typed in the opening of this thread, one thing is stands out; you have never been to China recently and experienced Chinese society 1st hand in this 21st century. (Correct me if I am wrong here)

The last time I was in China was mid last year, and I will be travelling there again in July this year. I have been to China's big 3 economic cities (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou) and their surrounding metropolis (nearby 2nd tier cities) as well as small towns and rural countrysides (where all you see is rice paddies in all directions).
From personal experience, all the stuff you wrote about Chinese people from one place not caring about Chinese people from another place; totally not true.
They may not care about the people on the other side of China as much as they do care about what's in front of them, but to say they dont care at all is simply not true. China, the nation, is always on Chinese people's minds, no matter where they are.

If you think that some army can march into one side of China and people on the other wont mind if it doesnt affect their lives, you are so mistaken I have to question your sanity.

And making references to events that are hundreds of years old to help justify your point suggests to me you can't find any recent, worthy evidence to support your argument.

As for the whole mother daughter marrying thing, which parent on this planet wouldn't want their daughters to marry someone that can provide for her and her future family??
To me, if you want the girl, you gotta earn her. You earn her by showing you not only love her, but have to capability to provide for her. If you can't, you don't deserve the girl, and she's better off with someone else. Period.

[Zhang Heng]

China is a large country, with a large population. She is a behemoth in terms of land area and population. Clannishness and minding your own business is the norm for such a configuration. Compare China with Europe, basically a large peninsula made up of dozens of separate states, each with very distinct culture and language. Where is the unity among Europeans? Ever since the fall of Romans I can only name a few unifying force in European history: Charlegmagne, Napoleon and Hitler. Despite a common Roman heritage and Latin roots, the Europeans have literally been killing each other for Millenia.

This post has been edited by Zhang Heng: 19 March 2010 - 04:45 PM

[Bill]

A lot of what Roger have said isn't a reflection of our civilization but simply a state of being poor and uncivilized. Parents would sell their children not because they want to, it's because they have to. Neighbors will kill each other for food if there isn't enough to go around. Corruption is partly a product of being poor.

I would argue this is also why Africa is always in trouble. Do bad governance and street crime make Africa undeveloped? I personally believe it's other way around; it is precisely because Africa is so poor, that you see a lot of bad people. Even Europe had it's share of bad people (WW1, WW2, Hitler, dictators, countless internal wars, the list is as long as Africa's). Yet those bad things have disappeared in Europe while stayed in Africa, why? I would argue that it's because Europe got richer and Africa is still dirt poor.

Inversely, people would "care" more if the country is better off. The clannishness Roger refer to is a byproduct of being uncivilized, aka poor. It basically work like this. In the beginning, there is the self. Gradually, there is the small tribal clan. Then there are the city states. Then there are the small geographical groupings aka country, which grow bigger and bigger. Chinese would care more if the country is more developed: richer, tech advances, etc.

So to sum up. Get civilized (by getting rich) and everything pretty much follows, all the problems you see will disappear. Now this process isn't quick either. You can't get rich overnight and expect a country to change from nomads to a great civilization (What's happening now with MidEast). You need generations of well off, rich people; centuries of continued prosperity.

Also I would say it's in one's own advantage to fight war and one must win. It is in my opinion vital that China have a strong military that can project power far and beyond. China must be able to defend itself against all adversaries then take it to them.

[wdl76]

yongke, on Mar 23 2010, 06:44 AM, said:

A lot of what Roger have said isn't a reflection of our civilization but simply a state of being poor and uncivilized. Parents would sell their children not because they want to, it's because they have to. Neighbors will kill each other for food if there isn't enough to go around. Corruption is partly a product of being poor.

I would argue this is also why Africa is always in trouble. Do bad governance and street crime make Africa undeveloped? I personally believe it's other way around; it is precisely because Africa is so poor, that you see a lot of bad people. Even Europe had it's share of bad people (WW1, WW2, Hitler, dictators, countless internal wars, the list is as long as Africa's). Yet those bad things have disappeared in Europe while stayed in Africa, why? I would argue that it's because Europe got richer and Africa is still dirt poor.

Inversely, people would "care" more if the country is better off. The clannishness Roger refer to is a byproduct of being uncivilized, aka poor. It basically work like this. In the beginning, there is the self. Gradually, there is the small tribal clan. Then there are the city states. Then there are the small geographical groupings aka country, which grow bigger and bigger. Chinese would care more if the country is more developed: richer, tech advances, etc.

So to sum up. Get civilized (by getting rich) and everything pretty much follows, all the problems you see will disappear. Now this process isn't quick either. You can't get rich overnight and expect a country to change from nomads to a great civilization (What's happening now with MidEast). You need generations of well off, rich people; centuries of continued prosperity.

Also I would say it's in one's own advantage to fight war and one must win. It is in my opinion vital that China have a strong military that can project power far and beyond. China must be able to defend itself against all adversaries then take it to them.

Isn't that what the current government tried to resolve?

Increase the living standard and give better education.

The above are social issues and has to be resolved with a social approach. Attack the root of the evil.

Aside from some psycho's I can't think of anyone willing to sell their children if they can provide for them, the reason for selling of children is not because the parents is hungry but the parents are afraid their children may go hungry and hoped by selling the children they will get a better life, a life that they can never provide. (CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG)

[IchiNiSan]

wdl76, on Mar 23 2010, 07:13 AM, said:

Aside from some psycho's I can't think of anyone willing to sell their children if they can provide for them, the reason for selling of children is not because the parents is hungry but the parents are afraid their children may go hungry and hoped by selling the children they will get a better life, a life that they can never provide. (CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG)

You know, talking about Psycho's. A bit off-topic, but anyhow. What the world and some of our members here tend neglect is the huge population size of China.

A country which everyone know like The Netherlands has like only 17 million people. In this country there were several amazing crazy Psycho cases. So China has in potential about 80 times or more chance of having psycho's among us. Heck, at least in China we don't have psycho's jumping into a school taking revenge on the teachers and schoolmates.

[Zhang Heng]

wdl76, on Mar 22 2010, 11:13 PM, said:

Isn't that what the current government tried to resolve?
Increase the living standard and give better education.
The above are social issues and has to be resolved with a social approach. Attack the root of the evil.
Aside from some psycho's I can't think of anyone willing to sell their children if they can provide for them, the reason for selling of children is not because the parents is hungry but the parents are afraid their children may go hungry and hoped by selling the children they will get a better life, a life that they can never provide. (CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG)

I think you make a good point there. You know, I am the 4th child that my parents had. When I was a baby, they were considering giving me away to a wealthier couple who couldn't have children, not for money either, but simply because my parents didn't think they could support me, and that I might have better life with the couple. So it was not selling me, but rather, giving me up for Adoption. Now, if that wealthier couple were to give my parents some money in exchange for me, I wouldn't blame my parents for taking the money either.

[Zhang Heng]

IchiNiSan, on Mar 23 2010, 01:57 AM, said:

You know, talking about Psycho's. A bit off-topic, but anyhow. What the world and some of our members here tend neglect is the huge population size of China.

A country which everyone know like The Netherlands has like only 17 million people. In this country there were several amazing crazy Psycho cases. So China has in potential about 80 times or more chance of having psycho's among us. Heck, at least in China we don't have psycho's jumping into a school taking revenge on the teachers and schoolmates.

Yes, you hardly hear cases such as Columbine shooting, or Virginia Tech shooting in China. But cases such as these, or cases of Americans kidnaping and abusing young children, or women seems all too common on the News. You would think people living in the Free World, enjoying Democracy, and such High Material wealth would be more civilized. Its true, there are many Americans who try to be good, but some Americans follow the examples of their leaders. Which leaders am I talking about? Politicians, Corporate CEO's etc...

Embezzelment, Scandals, Draft dodging are not uncommon among the Elites of American Society. Enron Scandal, World Com scandal, the case of the New York Governor (Spitzer, I think?) who was caught running a prostitution ring, and then there is the everyday scandals of local Mayors or Governors embezzling State/City funds, or accepting bribes for no bid contracts etc....
Not that China is much better, but corruption is rampant in the United States as well.

[Zhang Heng]

And not to mention the Credit Default Swaps, Mortgage Back Securities shell games that American money managers sold to the unsuspecting populace, which eventually caused the Financial Crisis in USA, and ripple effect to financial institutions all over the world.