China - o noua putere mondiala

[ablium]

I think that we are getting into meaningless discussion as you ask me to define what China means. My points are clear,

1. As a whole country, China's GDP will be very large. Maybe the word "formidable" was a vague word.

2. Chinese GDP/capita is much lower than developed country. That is why it is still a developing country. It will take very long time for China catch up in GDP/capita. However, this does not mean that they didn't achieve something significantly in last twenty-five years considering the starting point that they had a quarter of century ago. At least, China was doing much better than most countries with the same starting point of GDP/capita 25 years ago. I have no intention to debase Romania. Since you and I are both familar with Romania, let me just quote some data for comparision. In the early 1980s, Romanian had electricity consumption per capita (which I believe is a good economic indicator) is at least five times more (It could be 10 times. I made calculation when I was in Romania. My memory is a little bit vague now) than Chinese, but now they are close. Romania already had a portion of expressway in the early 1980s (If I remember correctly, the length was about 40 km). China just started building its first expressway in 1988. China has now expressway length per capita three time more than Romania.

3. There is a development disparity between coast and inland. The costal area used to grow at about 10-15% annually. Inland was growing at 5-10%. Even averaging over the whole country, 10% of growth rate is still considered high speed of development. The central government is copying the coastal success experience to the inland. From the data that I have seen, inland provinces are also growing now at about 10% annually.

[ladyatrix]

of course china is/will be a formidable country (pitty ablium doesnt find it good enough to live there)
why is china a formidable country? because :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4515197.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4491026.stm

and also because:
Psychological Counseling - China's prisons have a reputation for being harsh, no-nonsense places which dole out forced labour as part of jail sentences, but some have begun offering inmates some unusual psychological help, state media said. Prisons in China are beginning to provide mental health clinics and some even have "abreaction rooms" where inmates can vent their frustrations and release tension by hitting a hanging sandbag, the official Xinhua news agency said. In a prison in the coastal city of Hangzhou, prisoners seeking psychotherapy can first use the abreaction room and then go to another room to talk with psychologists about their problems, Xinhua said. The clinic is open to prisoners at the end of every month and they can either put forward a request by themselves or be recommended by prison guards.

In China, such expression can be prosecuted with zeal; sentences are stiff. Take Zhang Wei, in a Chongqing jail for six years for running unapproved news in his paper. Or Huang Aiping, in a Fujian jail seven years for being an elder in an illegal Protestant church that allowed "holy singing and dancing

and also because:
"...The Chinese do not use the international classification of diseases, as has been developed by the World Health Organization, they have a Chinese classification of mental diseases, like the Soviets had theirs. They have special terminology for people who have reformist ideas or deviant religious thoughts, and are therefore perceived to be mentally ill
http://www.faluninfo.net/psychabuse/index.asp

[ablium]

Ladyatrix, China is far far away from a perfect society, but China is not a hell either. Do you really think that Chinese work under guns? My brother has returned to China after living in Australia for ten years because he find better growth opportunity in China. I could also return to China if I can find a good opportunity.

Harry Wu mentioned in the BBC report lives in Silicon Valley where I live. I saw him once. He personally makes profit from his China bashing work which meets the need of some politicians. Almost all Chinese living in Silicon Valley have no respect for him. I think that prisoners need to work and they should not be the burden of a society. However, it is nonsense to say to that China’s economic achievement is because of the work of prisoners. In US, prisoners can enjoy pretty good life and it costs huge amount of tax-payers’ money. Is it fair for you to pay your hard-earned money for criminals? US crime rate is high and the prisons are full. Many Americans also question their prison systems.

Different countries see psychiatric problem differently. What is big deal about it? Different countries or different persons see gay issue differently, don’t they?

If I were a Romanian, I would not be bothered to read those sensational media reports that pick a few incidents to make big story and I would rather try to find if there is any good Chinese experience that can be used for me or for Romania.

No country can make every body happy. If you see homeless people sleeping on the street of New York, you might wonder how this can be possible in the world richest country.

[ladyatrix]

Ablium, din nou pui problema cum iti convine tie. nu am zis ca e anormal ca detinutii sa lucreze, dar nu mi se pare corect:
1. sa lucreze in conditii inumane
2. sa fie retinuti si pusi sa lucreze pentru ani de zile FARA A FI JUDECATI SI CONDAMANTI IN FATA UNUI TRIBUNAL
3 sa fie detinuti pt ca sunt adeptii unei anumite religii sau pt ca nu sunt de acord cu regimul politic


nu il cunosc pe mr wu si nu te cunosc pe tine. tu imi spui ca mr wu minte si ca face bani din povestile sale despre echivalentul gulagului in china. tu uiti ca vin dintr-o tara care a avut gulagul ei, romanii au fost reeducati ba prin siberia, ba pe la canalul dunare-marea neagra, ba pe la inchisorile de la gherla, aiud, pitesti. asa ca oricat de fantasmagorice par povestile lui wu pt tine, asta nu inseamna ca ele sunt neadevarate. http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=22295
am auzit destule chestii similare despre detinutii politici din romania, am citit destule chestii similare- de ex soljenitin
apropo, tu l-ai intalnit odata pe mr wu si il acuzi de minciuna. eu, daca te vad odata, pot dupa aia sa afirm despre tine ca esti agent de spionaj al beijingului pus sa faca lobby pro china in silicon valley?)

[ablium]

Ladyatrix,
The psychology of Harry Wu is very simple. He was in born in a rich banker family. The communist revolution took all properties of his family. He was unfairly treated in the absurd Culture Revolution and other communist movement. Then he came to America after China was open to the world. But he had no technical skill to survive in America and ended up being a homeless. In principle, American government should deport him because he used false identification document (other’s social security number) to work in a donut shop as he confessed in the article. America is a practical society. You have to find some work so that you can earn money for living no matter who you are. Harry Wu, as a son of banker in Shanghai, is a pretty smart guy and later found that he can make living by telling the story of his life and bashing on China.

Did you watch an Iraqi testifying that Iraq had WMD at US congress on TV? That Iraqi wanted to run for the office of Iraq government after US invasion but was arrested later by US army for being a double-agent. There are all kinds of dishonest people who want to profit from the media need and stupidity of some US foreign policies.

My family and even I myself as child were unfairly treated in the Culture Revolution. That is all past now. Chinese communist government mistreated many rich families during the revolution era, but China is heaven of capitalism now. I even feel that the capitalism goes too far in China as the income disparity has become too high.

What is called “humane working condition”? Countries of different economic development level have different definitions. EU sees the death penalty in US as inhumane too.

I think that those political controversial issues are not top priorities of Romania. The most important issue for Romania is economic development. Although EU found all kinds of excuses to not accept Romania so far, the unspoken bottom line is that some of existing EU members are worrying about the impact caused by the income disparity between Romania and their countries.

Am I a spy agent for China? I passed FBI strict security check and was offered a job in the Army Research Lab near Pentagon after I got my Ph.D., but I did not accept the job.

Do you work for a human right organization? If so, I can understand why you are so preoccupied with those issues.

[low_level_superhero]

Ablium, sometimes you over react. You can call China whatever you want, but not capitalist. When all the power is in one hand, when everything needs an authorization from the same entity, it is not capitalism. Not by far. I really do not understand why people, especially educated people, attach income disparity to capitalism. You should know better.

Ablium, cateodata o iei pe aratura. China este orice, numai capitalista nu. Cand puterea este atat de concentrata si este necesara o autoriwatie pentru absolut orice chiar nu se poate nu capitalista. Nu inteleg de ce oamenii atribuie discrepantele sociale capitalismului.

[ablium]

Capitalism inherently leads to income disparity. However, in modern western countries, there are several other institutions and mechanisms that control the increase of income disparity, such as labor union, labor law, social security system, welfare system, tax system (higher rate for higher income), high tax rate for heritage property, etc.

Whether China is a capitalism country, it really depends how you define capitalism. You can also say that Japan or South Korea is not capitalism countries. In many cases, they have even stronger government regulation than China. Chinese government does have strong involvement in its economy. Saying that Chinese government has all power on the China's economic activity is an overstatement. If Chinese government has all power on its hand, why are all western enterprises (not just manufacturers) rushing to China now? Is India a capitalism country? India has much stronger regulation on foreign capital and foreign companies have strong barriers to enter some business sectors, such as retail. China has opened virtually every sector for foreign capitals except media. By the way, US also has strong regulations on media sector for foreign companies. The only element of capitalism that China lacks is full floating exchange rate, but I think that it will happen in short time because there is also a strong voice in China now to go full floating and become an international currency.

[low_level_superhero]

Capitalism inherently leads to income disparity

Wrong. Power concentration leads to income disparity and most of all social inequality. Communism leads to those. Capitalism leads a free market and almost equal opportunities. The capital must be employed in risky activities in order to create profit. Power is employed without risks. Does not change owners in that system.

Gresit. Concentrarea puterii duce la dezechilibre. Financiare sau sociale. Pentru a aduce profit capitalul trebuie implicat in activitati riscante. Spre deosebire de putere.

Chinese government does have strong involvement in its economy

C'mon... You are not that naive. There is not one business in China that does not need authorizations after authorizations. And we all know how those are given.

Chinese government decides on what business is to be done. If you have legislation and you bound to that legislation it is ok, because everybody has to. But when some do and some do not, when people are deciding randomly about those things, it is not a free market.

Why western companies go to China? Because it is cheaper to establish operations in China then to continue in western countries. Cost cuts. When operating in China will be more expensive then establishing new production facilities together with infrastructure in Africa, they will go to Africa. But by then, China will be a market, not a labourer.

Nu poti fi atat de naiva. Nu exitsa o afacere in China care sa nu aiba nevoie de autorizatii peste autorizatii; Si stim cu totii cum sunt obtinute acele autorizatii.

Guvernul chinezesc decide asupra caror afaceri vor fi acceptate. Cand ai o lege si toata lumea o respecta este ok. Cand ai oameni care iau decizii la "intamplare" nu este o piata libera.

Companiile vestice vin in China pt. ca este mai ieftin sa deschizi acolo fabrici decat sa continui in cele din vest. Cand fabricarea in China va fi mai scumpa decat efectuarea aceleiasi operatii in Africa + construirea infrastructurii, atunci vor merge in Africa.

[ablium]

Originally Posted by low_level_superhero

Wrong. Power concentration leads to income disparity and most of all social inequality. Communism leads to those. Capitalism leads a free market and almost equal opportunities. The capital must be employed in risky activities in order to create profit. Power is employed without risks. Does not change owners in that system. .

Let me just ask you a simple question. Is income disparity in current Romania higher or lower than in Ceausescu era? In China, the current income disparity is higher than that of thirty years ago. Equal opportunity is just a slogan of idealism. It has never been true and will never be true. Does a boy born in a poor family have equal opportunity as a boy born in rich family? I am not an advocate of equalitarianism. I believe that maintaining some income disparity is needed to make society competitive and progressive. However, when income disparity is too high, the society will have a series of problems.

Originally Posted by low_level_superhero

C'mon... You are not that naive. There is not one business in China that does not need authorizations after authorizations. And we all know how those are given..

This is true for almost all countries. In US, I need city government's approval in order to turn on a newly installed equipment, even though the same type of equipment is widely installed in many other places and has nothing to do with pollution.

Originally Posted by low_level_superhero

Chinese government decides on what business is to be done. If you have legislation and you bound to that legislation it is ok, because everybody has to. But when some do and some do not, when people are deciding randomly about those things, it is not a free market.

In any country, government’s decision that regulate business is based on not only legislation, but also administrative policies which are generally more flexible and depending on the officers in the government. However, I do agree that China’s business legislation needs further improvement.

Originally Posted by low_level_superhero

Why western companies go to China? Because it is cheaper to establish operations in China then to continue in western countries. Cost cuts. When operating in China will be more expensive then establishing new production facilities together with infrastructure in Africa, they will go to Africa. But by then, China will be a market, not a labourer.

What you said is true for manufacture sectors. How do you explain the retail sectors, restaurant sector, banking sector, and insurance sectors, etc.? Obviously, those western corporations have made careful calculations on the return of their investment.

[low_level_superhero]

Originally Posted by ablium

Let me just ask you a simple question. Is income disparity in current Romania higher or lower than in Ceausescu era? In China, the current income disparity is higher than that of thirty years ago.

I really do not know, and income was not an issue, but access to goods. I do know that it was extremly easy to have so much more then what my family had. The income disparity right now it is not made by the capitalist system, but by the remains of the comunist system. It is just that right now you can see the differences because people from different enviorments interact, unlike 20 years ago. You will have to tak my word on that. Or not.

Nu am de unde sa stiu, insa oricum venitul nu era problema ci accesul la bunuri. Tot ce stiu este ca era foarte usor sa ai mult mai mult decat avea familia mea. Diferentele dintre clase acum nu sunt create de un sistem capitalist ci de ramasitele comunismului. Acum diferentele sunt vizibile doar pentru ca interactionam unii cu altii. Nu am cum sa dovedesc asta.

Originally Posted by ablium

Equal opportunity is just a slogan of idealism. It has never been true and will never be true. Does a boy born in a poor family have equal opportunity as a boy born in rich family? I am not an advocate of equalitarianism. I believe that maintaining some income disparity is needed to make society competitive and progressive. However, when income disparity is too high, the society will have a series of problems.

maybe it will always exist, but the size does matter.

Poate ca va exista intotdeauana, dar importanta este marimea.

Originally Posted by ablium

What you said is true for manufacture sectors. How do you explain the retail sectors, restaurant sector, banking sector, and insurance sectors, etc.? Obviously, those western corporations have made careful calculations on the return of their investment.

Of course. When China will get expensive it will also get rich. It will be a market (especially for services) and not a producer.

Bineinteles. Cand China va fi scumpa, va fi de asemenea bogata. Va fi o piata, nu un producator.

[ladyatrix]

[QUOTE=ablium]Ladyatrix,
The psychology of Harry Wu is very simple. He was in born in a rich banker family. The communist revolution took all properties of his family. He was unfairly treated in the absurd Culture Revolution and other communist movement. Then he came to America after China was open to the world. But he had no technical skill to survive in America and ended up being a homeless. In principle, American government should deport him because he used false identification document (other’s social security number) to work in a donut shop as he confessed in the article. America is a practical society. You have to find some work so that you can earn money for living no matter who you are. Harry Wu, as a son of banker in Shanghai, is a pretty smart guy and later found that he can make living by telling the story of his life and bashing on China.

ablium, why do u try to give wrong information? look what wikipedia say about harry wu. i looked on other sites, none deny he was working at Berkeley University for quite a few years

Released in 1979 in the liberalization which followed the death of Mao Zedong, Wu left China and went to the United States, where he became a visiting professor of geology at the University of California at Berkeley. There he began writing about his experiences in China. In 1992 he resigned his academic post and became a human rights activist dedicated to exposing the truth about China. He established the Laogai Research Foundation, a non-profit research and public education organization. The work of the foundation is recognized as a leading source of information on China's labor camps. Wu has testified before various United States Congressional committees, as well as the British, German and Australian Parliaments, the European Parliament and the United Nations.

In 1995 Wu, by then a U.S. citizen, was arrested as he tried to enter China with valid, legal documentation. He was held by the Chinese government for 66 days before he was convicted in a show trial for "stealing state secrets." He was sentenced to 15 years in prison, but was immediately expelled from China. He attributes his release to an international campaign launched on his behalf.

Wu received the Freedom Award from the Hungarian Freedom Fighters’ Federation in 1991. In 1994 he received the first Martin Ennals Human Rights Award from the Swiss Martin Ennals Foundation. In 1996, he was awarded the Medal of Freedom from the Dutch World War II Resistance Foundation. He also received honorary degrees from St. Louis University and the American University in Paris during 1996.

oh, and by the way, here is something quite interesting :
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...fWu%2c%20Harry
PUBLIC LIVES; Witness to the Atrocity Behind the Medicine


*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information. February 27, 1998, Friday
By JOYCE WADLER (NYT); Metropolitan Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section B, Page 2, Column 4, 1102 words
DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - Human rights advocate Harry Wu spent 19 years in Chinese prison camps before coming to US in 1985; he has made four undercover trips to China to research and document human-rights abuses; Wu recently posed as doctor, meeting with two Chinese citizens who reportedly offered to sell him kidneys from prisoners who had been executed in China; that meeting, which Wu videotaped, led to arrest of two men by FBI

but of course, wikipedia lies, new york times lies, bbc lies, only ablium and chinese government know the truth. i am sorry to say, you may be a nice lady but i cant find any value in your oppinion anymore.

[low_level_superhero]

Originally Posted by ladyatrix

i cant find any value in your oppinion anymore.

De aia se numesc opinii si nu adevaruri. Orice opinie are o anumita valoare. Nici bbc, nici cnn si cu atat mai putin wiki, nu spun ADEVARUL. Ci doar o parere, o perceptie.

This is why they are called opinions and not THE TRUTH. Any opinion has its value. BBC, cnn, wiki are not THE TRUTH. They are just opinions.

[ablium]

Originally Posted by ladyatrix

ablium, why do u try to give wrong information? look what wikipedia say about harry wu. i looked on other sites, none deny he was working at Berkeley University for quite a few years

Released in 1979 in the liberalization which followed the death of Mao Zedong, Wu left China and went to the United States, where he became a visiting professor of geology at the University of California at Berkeley. There he began writing about his experiences in China. In 1992 he resigned his academic post and became a human rights activist dedicated to exposing the truth about China. He established the Laogai Research Foundation, a non-profit research and public education organization. The work of the foundation is recognized as a leading source of information on China's labor camps. Wu has testified before various United States Congressional committees, as well as the British, German and Australian Parliaments, the European Parliament and the United Nations.

In 1995 Wu, by then a U.S. citizen, was arrested as he tried to enter China with valid, legal documentation. He was held by the Chinese government for 66 days before he was convicted in a show trial for "stealing state secrets." He was sentenced to 15 years in prison, but was immediately expelled from China. He attributes his release to an international campaign launched on his behalf.

Wu received the Freedom Award from the Hungarian Freedom Fighters’ Federation in 1991. In 1994 he received the first Martin Ennals Human Rights Award from the Swiss Martin Ennals Foundation. In 1996, he was awarded the Medal of Freedom from the Dutch World War II Resistance Foundation. He also received honorary degrees from St. Louis University and the American University in Paris during 1996.
but of course, wikipedia lies, new york times lies, bbc lies, only ablium and chinese government know the truth. i am sorry to say, you may be a nice lady but i cant find any value in your oppinion anymore.

What I said might not be true. Just take my opinions as reference.

Harry Wu was in jail for 19 years after he was 23 years old. He probably does not even have a Bachelor degree according to Wikipedia description about him. University of California at Berkeley is a top university in USA and all faculty members must have exceptional academic qualification with Ph.D. degree from top universities. Do you think that he is qualified to be a visiting professor in Berkeley? If he is so qualified, why did he have to work in a donut shop? Use your mind to think about it. I sympathize with his unfortunate and mistreated past, but I really don’t like what he is doing now.

There was a case of cannibalism in Germany. Do you think Germany is a society of cannibalism?

I don’t think other readers of this thread are interested about who the hell Harry Wu is.

[ladyatrix]

asa ma gandeam si eu, cine e acest om sa se apuce ablium sa ofere informatii false despre el? poate ca cine citeste acest thread nu e interesat cine este Harry Wu, dar cu siguranta e interesat sa citeasca informatii adevarate, mai ales de la persoane care posteaza frecvent, asa cum esti tu, ablium. nu cred ca cine intra pe acest thread vrea sa vada minciuni si <barfe mici> de genul: ah, a lucrat intr-o gogoserie. si chiar sa fi lucrat, cunosc cativa oameni extrem de calificati care in perioade mai putin faste ale vietii lor a trebuit sa lucreze sub pregatirea pe care au avut-o. faptul ca domnul respectiv a lucrat intr-o gogoserie nu exclude faptul ca a fost visiting professor la Berkeley sau research fellow la stanford, dupa cum precizeaza gazeta harvardului (na, acu or fi mintind si astia).
http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/...entWuToVi.html
cat despre faza cu canibalismul, vorba ta ablium, use ur brain and try againce naiba ai vrut sa spui numai tu intelegi. poate ca daca e doar un canibal german, ar fi trebuit sa il lasam sa zburde liber rontaind osciore?
obisnuiesc sa acord tot creditul unei persoane pana la proba contrarie. cand ablium s-a dovedit ca ofera informatii false, gasesc foarte logic sa nu mai pun pret pe opiniile ei

[valh]

Pornind de la titlul topicului trebuie sa ne intrebam ce inseamna putere mondiala . Desigur reducand celelalte elemente care compun definitia puterii mondiale , la numarul de locuitori ,putem spune ca China la cele 1,3 miliarde ale sale poate fi definita ca fiind aceasta.
Dar sa nu uitam un factor important, organizarea interna.Un stat a carei organizari interne este rigida sau care face o discriminare fatisa intre membrii societatii permitand doar unora,putini,obtinerea de recompense,determina o pozitie ostila a populatiei ceea ce face ca seful acelui stat sa se concentreze asupra problemelor interne mai mult decat este necesar in conditii normale ,conditii existente in statele democrate.Divizarea politica interna a acelui stat reduce enorm stabilitatea sa politica si nimeni nu este interesat sa se alieze sau sa conlucreze cu un partener care nu-si poate limpezi in mod democratic tulburarile domestice.Datorita acestui fapt ,a neclaritatii domestice,a evolutiei sale politice interne ,china nu este considerata ca avand perspectiva de a deveni o mare putere sau o putere mondiala prea curand.Potrivit gandirii si experientei occidentale,dezvoltarea economica functioneaza la parametrii maximi in mediul unei politici pluripartide,iar democratizarea vietii politice exclude atitudinea autoritara ,de constrangere,ca singura modalitate de impunere a puterii politice asupra propriilor cetateni.Instabilitatea sociala ,nearmonizarea structurilor politice,administrative si economice intre ele ,incapacitatea de a dezvolta toate segmentele sistemului social ma fac sa fiu sceptic ca China va deveni prea curand o putere mondiala.

[ablium]

Ladyatrix,
I know US universities too well. Harry Wu might hold a visiting professor title for while in Berkeley. Visiting professor or visiting scholar in America is nothing. It is often a courtesy title. The person holding visiting professor title does not necessary get payment or is sometimes paid at level of graduate student stipend about $1000/month-$1500/month, which is not even enough to survive in Silicon Valley. Visiting professor is not necessary a teaching position. It is not considered a permanent job or is tenure-track position (which means that it has chance to become life-time professor). UC Berkeley could just give him the title because he is a "celebrity" of human right, so that it does not look too ugly.
He might have chance to give a talk in Harvard or Yale because he is a "celebrity" of human right. But no body will offer him a permanent teaching position because he is not qualified for an academic position, period! Don't be obsessed about it. It is meaningless.

I can assure you that what I said above is true.

If you still have doubt, read carefully the following link given by you.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=22295

He came to America as a visiting professor, but he had no money to rent an apartment to live. Does it make sense for you?

[ild12]

albium.. n-ai dreptate in legatura cu titlul acela. universitatile de top nu-si permit sa-l acorde oricui. e drept insa ca nu e acordat mereu pe merite academice. si politica joaca un rol. insa cand o universitate din ivy league acorda un titlu atunci exista o motivatie puternica pentru asta. nu se intampla doar din politete.

[ladyatrix]

look how inconsistent you are, ablium. how difficult is to say: <ok, i provided the wrong information, i am sorry>?
you said:

He probably does not even have a Bachelor degree according to Wikipedia description about him. University of California at Berkeley is a top university in USA and all faculty members must have exceptional academic qualification with Ph.D. degree from top universities. Do you think that he is qualified to be a visiting professor in Berkeley?

and a few hours later:
[QUOTE=ablium]I know US universities too well. Harry Wu might hold a visiting professor title for while in Berkeley.

please dont patronise me, i know what visiting professor means, i suppose because he wasnt paid (too much) he didnt have enough money for a flat, and maybe for the same reason he needed to work in a donut shop. nota bene, he never said he was in a permanent position at berkeley.

you said that for u what matter is financial level and you dont think that democratic values are very important. so, why do u accuse this man that he is after money, in spite of the fact that his fundation is non profit?

anyway, do you realise that if both of us were chinese in china now, this online dialog would be impossible, because i would be in jail and i dont think they allow inmates to go online:P

[ablium]

Originally Posted by ild12

albium.. n-ai dreptate in legatura cu titlul acela. universitatile de top nu-si permit sa-l acorde oricui. e drept insa ca nu e acordat mereu pe merite academice. si politica joaca un rol. insa cand o universitate din ivy league acorda un titlu atunci exista o motivatie puternica pentru asta. nu se intampla doar din politete.

By the way, University of California at Berkeley is not a Ivy League university although it is a very good school. Ivy League Universities are all in east coast of US, where the history is longer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_League

Originally Posted by ladyatrix

look how inconsistent you are, ablium. how difficult is to say: <ok, i provided the wrong information, i am sorry>?
you said:


and a few hours later:

please dont patronise me, i know what visiting professor means, i suppose because he wasnt paid (too much) he didnt have enough money for a flat, and maybe for the same reason he needed to work in a donut shop. nota bene, he never said he was in a permanent position at berkeley.

you said that for u what matter is financial level and you dont think that democratic values are very important. so, why do u accuse this man that he is after money, in spite of the fact that his fundation is non profit?

Ladyatrix,
I am absolutely consistent. What is inconsistent is western media report about him. Harry Wu was arrested at age 19 according to Wikipedia. Wikipedia never said that he finished university education. So I guess that he did not finish his university. He was released from jail at age 42 and came to America at age 48. How much professional training could he get during this period? If you read your link ( http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=22295 ) carefully, it said that he came to UC Berkeley as visiting scholar, not visiting professor. The qualification of visiting scholar is usually much lower than visiting professor. The media subtly changed “visiting scholar” to “visiting professor” to glorify him. Many Chinese came America with title of visiting scholars during 1980s and they generally had very weak academic and professional training because they wasted a lot of time during the Culture Revolution. Visiting scholars are often funded by individual professor’s research grant, but not university budget. Visiting scholars are often poorly paid and many American professors use visiting scholars as cheap labor or even free labor. He could not visit UC Berkeley forever as a visiting scholar and so he had to find a job outside of the university. With his inadequate professional training and age of 50s, it was almost impossible to find a decent job in America. So it was not a bad idea to become a “human right activist” to earn the money for living while he can discharge his resentment of Chinese communist government that mistreated him for twenty years when he was young. I can understand his resentment. However, Chinese communist government made complete change and made corrections of previous mistakes after the Culture Revolution ended. He was given a good job and he was granted an opportunity to study abroad, which was considered very privileged during 1980s. Now he is saying that China is an evil in every aspect to meet the need of some people so that he can make good living from it. I have high respect for the person who had courage to stand in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square, but I have no respect for Harry Wu.

Originally Posted by ladyatrix

anyway, do you realise that if both of us were chinese in china now, this online dialog would be impossible, because i would be in jail and i dont think they allow inmates to go online:P

Unfortunately, you can not read Chinese language. Otherwise, I will give you some internet links that will completely surprise you.

People from other countries have a lot misconception about China because China does not have BBC or CNN network to broadcast 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

[FirstUser]

Originally Posted by valh

Potrivit gandirii si experientei occidentale,dezvoltarea economica functioneaza la parametrii maximi in mediul unei politici pluripartide,iar democratizarea vietii politice exclude atitudinea autoritara ,de constrangere,ca singura modalitate de impunere a puterii politice asupra propriilor cetateni.

Teoretic aceasta afirmatie este corecta, practic insa, "gandirea si experienta" occidentala nu dau doi bani pe politica pluripartita, atitudinea autoritara samd, atat timp cat China indeplineste urmatoarele (si nu singurele) conditii:

1. mana de lucru calificata si in primul rand ieftina. De ce oare nu se imbulzesc marile companii occidenatale si la noi ca slava Domnului nu ducem lipsa de politica pluripartita, democratie samd ?

2. China mentine aceiasi politica deschisa fata de investitiile straine si totodata o politica forte, de impunere asupra propriilor cetateni. Personal cred ca nimeni nu isi doreste o China democrata, o China a miscarilor sociale, a grevelor lucratorilor din transporturi, a desconspirarii dosarelor de securitate, samd.

3. China isi tine granitele inchise si nu lasa sa-i scape printre degete decat un numar limitat si de ce nu, ales de oameni. Nimeni nu isi doreste o "invazie galbena" si problemele pe care le ridica aceasta. Aduti aminte cine au fost primii care au plecat din Romania dupa 90.

Si de ce nu:

4. potentialul Chinei de a se transforma dintr-o tara producatoare intr-una consumatoare. Cum spunea cineva mai sus, atunci cand nivelul de trai al chinezului de rand va creste si totodata pretentiile salariale se vor mari, multe din marile companii se vor muta (de exemplu) in Africa iar chinezii vor cumpara bascheti si tricouri Made in Somalia.

In concluzie, ca o parere personala, cred ca guvernul chinez face acum cam ceea ce ne doream noi prin anii 80 cand spuneam " ce bine ar fi domne daca Ceausescu ar mai slabi haturile, am gasi si noi prin alimentara ceva carnita, laptic si o portocala, am avea 24 de ore de program TV cu un film mai deochiat si o muzica straina, nu sar mai intrerupe curentul si ar disparea rationalizarile." Cu alte cuvinte, cred ca in China este o perioada a anilor 70 din Romania.