|
06-09-2006, 12:27
| #601 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 |
After the crackdown in Beijing on June 4, protests continued in much of mainland China for several days. There were large protests in Hong Kong, where people again wore black in protest. There were protests in Canton, huge protests in Shanghai with a general work strike. Streets and bridges were blocked around the country, and protests in at least six other major cities inside Communist China called for the removal of the 'criminal government.' There were also many more protests around the world, many adopting the use of black arm bands as well. deci o mana de studenti e cam putin spus...faptul ca au fost din toate paturile sociale ii face reprezentativi pt societate....dar, chiar lasand asta la o parte, numarul nu garanteaza succesul...au fost miscari de anvergura in istorie care au clacat, si miscari de mai mica amploare care au avut succes. ...la revolutia din 89, ce procent de romani a iesit in strada? in afara de 5-6 orase mari, restul au stat acasa la televizor. si dintre cei care au iesit, au fost ei <reprezentativi>? ce inseamna reprezentativ? cei care au iesit sa manifesteze la timisoara pt pastorul reformat erau reprezentativi pt romania? eu cred ca simpla calitate de cetatean te face reprezentativ, in afara de o patura subtire de nomenclaturisti, toti eram in aceeasi oala...auzi chestie, acu tre sa fi reprezentativ ca sa manifestezi in strada  asa zicea si iliescu de cei din piata universitatii, ca nu sunt reprezentativi pt populatia capitalei, ca sunt golani.Quote:
Quote:
| ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 13:07
| #602 (permalink) | ||
| Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 |
ladyatrix, macar ai citit tot de acolo? The first group included students and intellectuals, who believed that the reforms had not gone far enough and that China needed to reform its political systems, since the economic reforms had only affected farmers and factory workers; the incomes of intellectuals lagged far behind those who had benefited from reform policies. They were concerned about the social and political controls that the Communist Party of China still had. In addition, this group saw the political liberalization that had been undertaken in the name of glasnost by Mikhail Gorbachev. The second group were those, including urban industrial workers, who believed that the social and political reforms had gone too far. The loosening of economic control had begun to cause inflation and unemployment, which threatened their livelihood. In 1989, the primary supporters of the government were rural peasants who had seen their incomes increase considerably during the 1980s as a result of the Party's reforms. However, this support was limited in usefulness because rural peasants were distributed across the countryside. In contrast to urban dwellers who were organized into schools and work units, peasant supporters of the government remained largely unorganized and difficult to mobilize. Quote:
| ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 13:17
| #603 (permalink) | ||
| Bursucul vesel  Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Santiago Bernabeu |
Guys, sorry to bother you: the latest National Geographic magazine features an article about China and its recent economical growth. Maybe you'd like reading that article ...
__________________ Frustrated football fanatic The thruth is out there. | ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 14:52
| #604 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 |
da, am citit: They were concerned about the social and political controls that the Communist Party of China still had. low_level_superhero, chiar nu ma intereseaza ca tu vrei sa fi <original> si sa negi valoare de manifestare democratica a ceea ce s-a intamplat in 89 in tiananmen. ai vazut ca au avut sprijin in toata tara. au intrat cu armata pe ei s i-au potolit. nici macar acum nu se stie cate victime au fost. subiectul in sine e tabu in china. de ce? pt ca au fost 10 oameni care au cerut portie dubla de orez? cat de reprezentativi au fost cei care s-au dus la timisoara sa protesteze la casa lui tokes? | ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 15:05
| #605 (permalink) | ||
| Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 |
ladyatrix, asta e problema, ca au raspuns cu forta? Pai asta s-a intamplat si in Franta anul asta. Dar bineinteles, in Franta a fost justificat pentru ca ei deja sunt "liberi", dar chinezii saracii nu sunt "liberi". Ma repet, mai variaza de la CNN si BBC. Esti mai indoctrinata decat crezi. Sprijin din toata tara? Labor force - by occupation agriculture 49%, industry 22%, services 29%, si asta in 2003, nu '89. Cum poti spune ca au avut sprijin in toata tara cand au fost proteste in cateva orase mari? Quote:
| ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 15:17
| #606 (permalink) | |||
| Registered User  Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Republic of Earth | Quote:
The Chinese leaders were not sophisticated enough and they were not prepared to handle massive demonstration at the time. They even did not have well equipped anti-riot police. I have heard that they wanted to buy rubber-bullet guns and other anti-riot equipment from the west at the time, but the West did not want to sell. I believe that they will handle it much better if the similar event happens again. I think that Chinese communist government knows that they mishandled the student movement in 1989. That is why they don’t want to make any good or bad comments now on the event to bring the issue up again and to invite another demonstration. All they say is that let history make the judgment. The famous saying by Deng Xiaoping “No matter whether it is white cat or black cat, it is a good cat if it catches the mouse.” At the time, it means that no matter whether it is socialism or capitalism, it is a good system if it can help economic development. His pragmatism positively changed the fate of China. Today, I would like to interpret the saying as “no matter whether it is democracy or authoritarianism, it is a good system if it can help the economic development and save people from poverty.” Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by ablium; 06-09-2006 at 17:28.. | |||
|
|
06-09-2006, 18:57
| #608 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 | Quote:
Quote:
ablium a deschis discutia despre romania, chiar nu vad nimic rau in a privi comparativ unele aspecte. reusita sau nereusita unei actiuni sociale nu ii schimba scopul. la fel, nu stiu cat de important e procentul pe clase sociale ale celor care au participat la miscare (nu procentul in populatia generala, ca nu au fost toti la demonstratie). prin <sprijin in toata tara> m-am referit la aria geografica. LE. low_level_superhero, nu inteleg ce s-a intamplat cu ultima parte a postului, nu aveam deloc intentia sa ii dau delete...o fi fost din greseala. ma bucur ca ai prins ideea si nu trebuie sa tastez din nou Last edited by ladyatrix; 06-09-2006 at 19:31.. | ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 19:24
| #609 (permalink) | ||
| Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 | Quote:
) Iar in aceste cazuri, suportul este determinant pentru reusita ei. Eu nu spun ca studentii nu isi doreau libertati, spun doar ca erau singurii, si implicit protestul nu a reprezentat o manifestare a poporului chinez, ci al unei paturi sociale, nu foarte numeroasa (relativ nu foarte numeroasa, evident.). De aceea afirmatia: "Tianamen ne-a demonstrat ca poporul chinez isi doreste libertatea" este hazardata. Mie nu mi-a demonstrat decat ca exista oameni in China care isi doresc democratie. Mai putini (procentual) decat cei care isi doresc comunism in Romania.Nu era necesar editul. | ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 22:17
| #610 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Republic of Earth |
The current Western attitude is that if your society does not look like ours, you are an evil or you will fail. This attitude is used toward China, Muslim world, and many other countries. I think that the West better leave other countries alone and let them discover and solve their society problems by themselves. If the West wants to help other countries, it is fine, but the West should not act like the ultimate judge. God never said that every society must look alike. In spite of over twenty years of tracking record with overwhelming data showing that China is doing much better economically than India and In spite of that even a fool can see the current development difference between China and India, the West media frequently acts like a self-proclaimed prophet and predicts that India will eventually do better than China because India has democracy. I may not be as visionary as media reporter, but I am trained in science and I still believe that data-driven analysis is a better scientific method than the wishful thinking based on ideology. Last edited by ablium; 06-09-2006 at 22:36.. | ||
|
|
06-09-2006, 23:04
| #611 (permalink) | ||
| Moderator  Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Bucuresti |
Nu e concurs (cel putin aici) intre China si India Cat despre atitudinea vestului, chiar daca nu este corecta este fireasca. Orice societate ajunsa la un anumit nivel cultural incearca (nu stiu daca constient) sa-si impuna cultura (incluzand felul de a vedea lucrurile). Oricine se uita in curtea vecinului ii cantareste avutia si modul de viata dupa ale sale proprii. Daca occidentul ar fi avut influenta culturala a inuitilor (exemplu la intamplare) nimeni nu s-ar sesiza ca vestul isi "impune" cultura sa, incluzand hamburgerii, filmele de la Hollywood si political correctness-ul. In rest sunt oarecum de acord cu barney in ce priveste "nevoia" de democratie a Chinei. Si anume sunt de parere ca habar n-avem noi de realitatea, de viata de zi cu zi si de gandirea prevalenta in majoritatea Chinei. | ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 00:28
| #612 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 |
ablium, democracy, pluripartidism and free election are not working in the western world only. on the other hand i dont think that american congressmen are very worried about well beeing among chinese, but as a politician you must be concerned about a potential danger for his electors. china is a big non democratic state with a great human and ballistic potential. if worse come to worse, as chinese government doesnt care about property rights, forced relocation, labor rights, corruption, it wouldnt care about throwing them in a war. it was so much pressure on EU to lift the embargo on weapons sale to china (by the way, the embargo was in response to tiananmen crackdown) one of the officials in the army said last year: <if the americans draw their missiles on the target zone on china's teritory, i think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons>. errrr, right, from blue sky? who was threatening who with nuclear weapons? i wish to be as optimistic as you ablium about the good intentions of china's totalitarian regime. tell me, why china sustains the trend (since '90) in deffence budget growth rate exceeding overall economic growth? | ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 02:37
| #614 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Republic of Earth | Quote:
Who told you that democracy will guarantee not becoming militarily aggressive? What do you think about US invasion in Iraq? Well, you can believe that the war was for the democracy and human right of Iraqi people. Who told you that "chinese government doesn't care about property rights, forced relocation, labor rights, corruption"? I have a feeling that you are brain-washed by the neocon media. I can fully understand if you worry about the Chinese economic competition. If you worry about Chinese military power, I can only say that your mind is not very sober. Any body wants to challenge American military power or launch a nuclear war or even launch a conventional war is simply a moron. US has 50% of world military spending. How could Chinese want to have a war with American while they have nearly one trillion of dollars deposited in American bank account? Throughout history of several thousands of years, Chinese was not expansionist conqueror and they rather put huge resource to build a wall with length of several thousands of kilometers for defense. I tell you why China increased its military budget. In 1980s, China significantly reduced its military spending and put more money in economy development after they assessed the reduced threat from Soviet Union. After watching the first Iraq war, Chinese knew that their military equipment was far behind, so they have to raise the military spending again. Obviously, China also wants to keep some military defense power so that foreign occupation and military defeat in 19th and 20th centuries will not be repeated again. If there is any hot spot that can cause potential military conflict between China and US is Taiwan issue. The official name of Taiwan is still “Republic of China”. The division between mainland China and Taiwan Island was the consequence of Chinese civil war which ended in 1949. In Taiwan, a part of people wants to officially become independent from China (although now Taiwan is de facto independent.). US and EU both officially recognize “one China” principle. In 1998, China did some military exercise to pressure Taiwan to not go independent. US sent two air carriers to Taiwan Strait. China wants peaceful unification with Taiwan, but China wants to keep a military pressure on Taiwan to prevent the growth of the faction that wants to go independent. In order to keep military pressure, China has to update its arm force. There is a significant barrier for unification at present, because the income disparity between mainland China and Taiwan is quite large now. However, time is on China’s side. Chinese government clearly knows that as the income disparity between mainland and Taiwan shrinks and Taiwan’s economy increasingly becomes more dependent on the mainland, the unification will be automatically the consequence. Why does China want EU to lift embargo? China buys a lot of arms from Russia. In business, if you only have a single supplier, you don't have much price bargaining power. Lifting embargo could also help solving the trade imbalance between EU and China. Don’t worry that China could become a threat to world peace because it is not democratic or does not respect human right by European standard. As China economy develops, those human right issues and democracy issues will automatically be solved. Chinese might have smaller eye than you, but they are also human being and want to have good life not war. Think more how Romania can become economically more competitive. I wish Romania can become more competitive and prosperous. I can understand why Romanian people resent communist and totalitarian government so much. I was there in 1980s. Ceausescu had completely failed economic policies and people even had difficulty to find food in the stores in the mid 1980s. Even Chinese communists privately criticized Ceausescu family's dictatorship at that time. However, don't think that current Chinese government is the same as Ceausescu's government. Last edited by ablium; 07-09-2006 at 15:28.. | ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 14:16
| #615 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 |
neocon media you bet.......is actually the anual report of deparment of defense to US congress- 2006. and yes, the main fear is taiwan strait, but long term speaking, china needs desperately primary resurces for its rapid expanding economy, and we have seen latelty a few wars entirely related to that. another top military chinese said 2 years ago:< when a nation grows strong enough, it practices hegemony. the sole purpose of power is to pursue even greater power>. a few years ago china said that it will not use nuclear power first, now <no first use> law is under heavy debates among chinese officials. and so on...... ablium, I am not expected you to say I am right. But I expect you to use the proper words. I am not interesting in what u think about my mind. and i am not interesing in what you think i should think | ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 14:33
| #616 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Republic of Earth | Quote:
| ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 15:49
| #618 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Republic of Earth |
Ladyatrix, Please read these articles. http://www.counterpunch.org/hallinan02232005.html http://www.antiwar.com/lind/?articleid=9084 Be careful, the authors could be spys for China. Last edited by ablium; 07-09-2006 at 16:45.. | ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 17:20
| #619 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 |
ablium, when i gave you examples why increase in chinese spending for high military technique represent a concern for US government, u said this is neocon press (as if neocon press is out law or something). no, is a very official point of view (not mine). now you show me 2 articles criticising the official point of view. this is democracy, the ideeas are open to debate, the law is aproved by more than a handfull of people. please, show me in chinese press articles criticising the government. oh, sorry, i forget they all seem to have exactly the same oppinion. must be wonderful, one single oppinion shared between 1,260,000,000 ( including people living on the island of Taiwan :P). what about the 70 000 cases of protest in 2005 in china? oh, sorry, i forget again, is a neocon report | ||
|
|
07-09-2006, 20:31
| #620 (permalink) | ||
| Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Republic of Earth | Quote:
Everything in the world can be seen from different angles. Everything in the world has good sides and bad sides. Any social-political system is not an exception. I have never said that China’s political system is better than that of the west. The frequent west arrogant attitude toward China is that “you must change your society to become the same as ours, otherwise, you are evil and you will certainly fail.” But China never does the opposite way. There is no contention that the West has more open media than China. Although the west societies have open public debates on various issues, the debates never reach a consensus and often lead to the division of the society. I have seen too many of such of debates in America including gay marriage, abortion right, gun ownership, health care reform… The public debate does not necessarily exclude government from making wrong decisions. Invasion of Iraq is an example, which in my view, is wrong no matter whether it is from the view points of US interest, moral ground, or international law. Surely, the public campaign debate can also bring the crown of governorship to the head of the movie screen hero, like in the case of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Although China does not bring every issue for the public debate, this does not mean that the government can not make right decisions. The Chinese government does have a group of decision makers that, in my view, are competent enough, and have the keenest consciousness of learning from the merit of other nations including west nations. They make decisions through internal debates with consideration of public opinions. I don’t say that Chinese way is better, but the public debate on controversial issues is not necessarily a superior means for decision making. I personally prefer decision based on the studies of independent think tanks. Neocons are not outlaws. They are just a group pro-war hardliners who have strong influence on the current US government. A large part of westerners including major proportion of Europeans strongly dislike Neocon’s ideology. The figure of 70,000 cases of protest in 2005 comes from Chinese government statistics. The vast majority of the protests are related to economic activities such as unsatisfactory compensation from the demolishing of old houses. The number of 70,000 does not necessarily indicate that Chinese government will collapse. In fact, the number could be a good indication because no disputes could mean no economic activities. By the time that I have written so many posts here, I have violated my own principle of being more enthusiastic about economic activities but less zealous about politics. So I have to decide to stop posting here and put more energy in my business. Thank you for reading my posts. Last edited by ablium; 08-09-2006 at 20:30.. | ||
|
| Advertisment | |
 Cumpără jocuri prin SMSRapid si sigur! | |
 |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| |
