Shamelessly plugged from EUOT:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/showbiz/2009-04/24/content_7710757.htm
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chinadaily.com.cn%2Fshowbiz%2Fimages%2Fattachement%2Fjpg%2Fsite1%2F20090424%2F0023ae5d932f0b5b4ffa02.jpg&hash=093fed2ba7682542e52f9a5cee466c7da10716e7)
QuoteWhy is China Angry?
China is not happy.
In fact China is "mad as hell and is not going to take this any more", to paraphrase a line from Network, the 1976 movie.
On closer inspection, it's not China in general but five middle-aged men in China. Their book China Is Not Happy has sold half a million copies in a few months, not counting bootleg copies and online piracy. Assuming buyers buy into their reasoning, a not-insignificant chunk of China is not happy.
The book claims China should assert itself - militarily, diplomatically and every other way imaginable. In this regard China Is Not Happy is a much catchier title than its predecessor, China Can Say No, which shares one of the same authors and was a bestseller in 1996.
Why is China angry?
China Is Not Happy, a book that has reportedly sold half a million copies in just a few months, is generating much controversy among readers. [China Daily]
Both are milestones in the country's nationalist movement. The difference is that the first one shook the nation while the follow-up has been met with a mixture of admiration, nonchalance and cynicism. The book stems from a few days' conversations with a group of die-hard "neo-leftists" and the authors stand accused of whipping up another jingoistic frenzy for the purpose of selling books.
Speaking of left and right, I should first clarify the definitions because they run counter to their Western parallels - in China, the left wing is considered "conservative" while the right wing equals "liberal". A person who espouses "patriotism" is regarded as "on the right" in the US but over here he is "on the left", even though he would be "conservative" in both countries. It makes sense when you think that China and the US are ideologically antipodean. It's like looking at each other face to face: What's left on my side is the right side on yours.
The five authors of this book, mostly academics in their 40s and 50s, expressed dismay at the rampant "liberalism" among their peers. They view those "liberal elites" as importers of Western ideas and practices, which they say have caused the wealth gap that exists in China, among other sins. On the other hand, they have found a new hope in the young, especially those born after 1980, who have been at the forefront of a reawakening of China's nationalist sentiments.
Contrary to what you may think, the authors are not sloganeering charlatans. They are extremely erudite and lucid. They predicted in the 1996 book that "in less than 10 years, or 15 years at most, the US economy will run into a huge problem" because, as the shared author Song Qiang contends, production and consumption in the US have been knocked askew by massive off-shoring of the manufacturing sector.
Why is China angry?
The authors are calling for a "conditional split with the West". They see the West as harboring a plan to "drag down" China, ample reason for this country to be shaken out of its post-Olympic contentment and stupor. China should aspire to be "an ambitious and heroic country" ... "conduct business with a sword in hand" ... "the path to victory for a rising power". They plead that the military should "go with the core interests of the country", that diplomats should wind down Sino-French relations and guard against the "roulette" diplomacy of the West. Most of all, China should "dare to wipe out evil and appease the good in the international community" and "clear the way of our growth of decadent winds".
Furthermore, anyone in China who does not share their radical beliefs is labeled a traitor and people like Wang Xiaobo, who advocated a more open and democratic society, are called "defeatists" and "demagogues of today's ugliest culture". They did not use the term "petty bourgeoisie" but came up with a similar moniker - "stripping away the artistic tone" - for those they deem apologists to the West.
OK, if this is too much jargon, let me put their point more bluntly: We are people with grand ambitions, and only grand ambitions suit this grand time and this grand country. As for the rest, you are a bunch of wimps and phonies, if not outright collaborators out to sell out China's interests.
In this Internet age full of soapbox opportunities, this is just what many want to hear. In a newly vociferous environment, the voice of reason is the first one to be drowned out. The more extreme you are, the more attention you'll get. I was pleasantly surprised that many people online questioned the real motive of the writers - to make a fast buck or to promote China's interests. A few reporters have noticed after interviewing the authors that they were not half as "adamant" as they sound in the book. They even mentioned "things in the West that we can learn from".
The ultra-left and the ultra-right are always at each other's throats but are the best bedfellows and need each other to exist. The ultra-left essentially says China will only gain its identity by kicking out every iota of Western influence. The ultra-right adores the West, sub-prime and all.
What's funny is, both sides claim the government is against them and portray themselves as being lone warriors out to save the world a la Don Quixote. For example, the government has been promoting Confucianism as an indigenous philosophy with universal appeal, an ideology relevant in an era of rapid development and unbounded yearning. The right tends to see this as an excuse to stifle criticism while the left calls it "daydream", in the words of China Is Not Happy, that will be ludicrous and futile, let alone to "save the world". In other words, Confucianism is too soft for the left and too hard for the right. By comparison, the government abides by Confucius' "Doctrine of the Mean".
The rise of the left is the result of frustration. The young are upset because they are thrust into a free market, cutthroat world of fierce competition and long for the days when an iron rice bowl was guaranteed.
The middle-aged, the authors included, suffered bouts of disappointment when their blind adoration of the West in the 1980s was dashed by a string of events that turned them from pro-West to anti-West. Now they see themselves as spokesmen of the new generation whose voices are not taken seriously by the "liberal elite".
The real question should be: Do the raucous represent the majority? And I suspect they do - this is not a fanciful notion but is based on my assessments of online opinions by countless young netizens every day.
There is nothing new with populism. The authors are in tune with the grassroots and their worries. They can certainly espouse their causes and ideals more forcefully than an average netizen, whose support for anything is summed up in one word - "ding". It is not the symptoms, but the remedies they prescribe that are fraught with danger. Yes, the reform has not lifted everyone out of poverty but does that mean we should go back to the old days when everyone lived a life of misery? China should be vigilant against unfriendly forces, but does that mean we should go out and treat everyone as a potential enemy?
Happiness is a feeling of contentment. In the eyes of the right, China can be happy only when the West is happy with us; and to the left, the same feeling swells up when the West is mad at us. The truth is, China can be happy when its people enjoy greater wealth, more freedom and better lives in every way - no matter what others say. It's about us, not how we are perceived.
What is more worrying than the oppressive Chinese government is the uncoerced rampant nationalism.
QuoteThe authors are calling for a "conditional split with the West". They see the West as harboring a plan to "drag down" China, ample reason for this country to be shaken out of its post-Olympic contentment and stupor. China should aspire to be "an ambitious and heroic country" ... "conduct business with a sword in hand" ... "the path to victory for a rising power". They plead that the military should "go with the core interests of the country", that diplomats should wind down Sino-French relations and guard against the "roulette" diplomacy of the West. Most of all, China should "dare to wipe out evil and appease the good in the international community" and "clear the way of our growth of decadent winds".
Replace 'the West' with 'England' and you have something very Wilhelmian: talking vaguely about being a strong and powerful country without any idea what exactly they want to do with their power.
I am somewhat annoyed they have the gall to accuse us of trying to "drag them down" when we have made them favored trading partners and such. Oh well.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 12:56:12 PM
Replace 'the West' with 'England' and you have something very Wilhelmian: talking vaguely about being a strong and powerful country without any idea what exactly they want to do with their power.
And we all remember how well that went. :)
I find it hilarious how the Chinese still think the Europeans have it in for them.
Quote from: Tyr on May 20, 2009, 01:02:24 PM
I find it hilarious how the Chinese still think the Europeans have it in for them.
Paranoia seems to have a rather long shelf life in certain cultures.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2009, 01:13:18 PM
Paranoia seems to have a rather long shelf life in certain cultures.
See: Russia.
Quote from: derspiess on May 20, 2009, 01:13:18 PM
Quote from: Tyr on May 20, 2009, 01:02:24 PM
I find it hilarious how the Chinese still think the Europeans have it in for them.
Paranoia seems to have a rather long shelf life in certain cultures.
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Are you saying every single culture that is not the United States is paranoid? I am not getting your point.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 12:56:12 PM
Replace 'the West' with 'England' and you have something very Wilhelmian: talking vaguely about being a strong and powerful country without any idea what exactly they want to do with their power.
I am somewhat annoyed they have the gall to accuse us of trying to "drag them down" when we have made them favored trading partners and such. Oh well.
I get the same feeling. The whole thing makes no sense. "Diplomacy with a sword in hand" to fight who? To do what? Fight the US? India? Russia? Is someone snubbing the Chinese? Why stop collaboration with the French? What the hell would that accomplish?
Damn liberal elites. :(
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 04:12:03 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Are you saying every single culture that is not the United States is paranoid? I am not getting your point.
Alot of Americans are paranoid. I've met some.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 04:12:03 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Are you saying every single culture that is not the United States is paranoid? I am not getting your point.
No, it applies to the Russians, the Middle East, China, and India to a lesser extent. This sort of feeling that the rest of the world is out to get you makes more sense if that's how the last two hundred years of history have seemed.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 04:12:03 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Are you saying every single culture that is not the United States is paranoid?
I agree.
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 04:42:42 PM
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 04:12:03 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Are you saying every single culture that is not the United States is paranoid? I am not getting your point.
No, it applies to the Russians, the Middle East, China, and India to a lesser extent. This sort of feeling that the rest of the world is out to get you makes more sense if that's how the last two hundred years of history have seemed.
Except they tend not to think that about the US. Or any other power (bar Japan of course). Its just the Europeans who used to pick on them back in the day who they always think still hate China.
The student killing Oligarchs in Peiping will crack down on these five middle aged mens with Tanks!
Quote from: Tyr on May 20, 2009, 07:08:28 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 04:42:42 PM
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 04:12:03 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on May 20, 2009, 02:07:25 PM
By certain cultures, you mean those that aren't currently on top, right?
Are you saying every single culture that is not the United States is paranoid? I am not getting your point.
No, it applies to the Russians, the Middle East, China, and India to a lesser extent. This sort of feeling that the rest of the world is out to get you makes more sense if that's how the last two hundred years of history have seemed.
Except they tend not to think that about the US. Or any other power (bar Japan of course). Its just the Europeans who used to pick on them back in the day who they always think still hate China.
To be fair, every decent human being hates China and longs for its liquidation.
Come to think of it, I've never met a happy Chinaman.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 20, 2009, 07:26:10 PM
Come to think of it, I've never met a happy Chinaman.
Might have something to do with their womenfolk.
Is the subtitle of the book; "It is vital for you to get a bilateral defence pact with the USA if you are within 5 hours flying distance of China" ?
We could only hope to see an eventual sequel in a future headline...
"China Is REALLY Not Fucking Happy Now: Japanese Diet Approves Nuclear Armament"
This is the sort of thing that makes me very receptive to the idea of rearming Japan with atomic weapons.
Quote from: Neil on May 20, 2009, 07:31:57 PM
This is the sort of thing that makes me very receptive to the idea of rearming Japan with atomic weapons.
But they know how to make nukes, right?
How many can they build per year?
Quote from: Siege on May 20, 2009, 08:05:27 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 20, 2009, 07:31:57 PM
This is the sort of thing that makes me very receptive to the idea of rearming Japan with atomic weapons.
But they know how to make nukes, right?
How many can they build per year?
They don't have the needed processing facilities. Non-nuclear powers usually don't. But give them 5 years and they can be building as many as they want.
Quote from: Viking on May 20, 2009, 08:07:09 PM
They don't have the needed processing facilities. Non-nuclear powers usually don't. But give them 5 years and they can be building as many as they want.
Never underestimate the cleverness of the Japanese.
Quote from: Siege on May 20, 2009, 08:05:27 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 20, 2009, 07:31:57 PM
This is the sort of thing that makes me very receptive to the idea of rearming Japan with atomic weapons.
But they know how to make nukes, right?
How many can they build per year?
Actually they probably don't know how to make them. Though they do know how take them.
Some guy figured out a way to make money by writing books. Not satisfied with one bestseller, he now repeats the same ideas in a sequel. Nothing to see here.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 20, 2009, 07:26:10 PM
Come to think of it, I've never met a happy Chinaman.
See me when I retire.
Quote from: Monoriu on May 20, 2009, 09:36:11 PM
Some guy figured out a way to make money by writing books. Not satisfied with one bestseller, he now repeats the same ideas in a sequel. Nothing to see here.
The nice thing about a dictatorship is that public opinion doesn't really matter anyway :P
I am glad this guy is just some nut.
Quote from: Monoriu on May 20, 2009, 09:37:30 PM
See me when I retire.
Don't tell me you don't feel a little happy everytime you leave work at night. I know I do.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 10:32:29 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on May 20, 2009, 09:37:30 PM
See me when I retire.
Don't tell me you don't feel a little happy everytime you leave work at night. I know I do.
Oh hell yeah. Every time I go home is a victory in itself.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 10:31:58 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on May 20, 2009, 09:36:11 PM
Some guy figured out a way to make money by writing books. Not satisfied with one bestseller, he now repeats the same ideas in a sequel. Nothing to see here.
The nice thing about a dictatorship is that public opinion doesn't really matter anyway :P
I am glad this guy is just some nut.
I can't imagine someone publishing such a book in the 80s. Sure, there is still a lot of censorship in China. But there has been progress.
Quote
Replace 'the West' with 'England' and you have something very Wilhelmian: talking vaguely about being a strong and powerful country without any idea what exactly they want to do with their power.
I am somewhat annoyed they have the gall to accuse us of trying to "drag them down" when we have made them favored trading partners and such. Oh well.
Of course in Germany that was official government thinking, whereas this is just a few guys writing a book. I could be horribly misled, but I haven't met a single person in China who shares this kind of thinking.
The fact is that China has been undergoing a profound societal transformation for 30 years. And whenever that happens in a society, there are bound to be opponents to it. Fortunately, in China's case, they appear to be a rather tiny minority.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 20, 2009, 07:26:10 PM
Come to think of it, I've never met a happy Chinaman.
I. M. Pei seemed to smile a lot.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 20, 2009, 11:49:44 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on May 20, 2009, 07:26:10 PM
Come to think of it, I've never met a happy Chinaman.
I. M. Pei seemed to smile a lot.
He worked on commission. ;)
Quote from: Siege on May 20, 2009, 08:05:27 PM
Quote from: Neil on May 20, 2009, 07:31:57 PM
This is the sort of thing that makes me very receptive to the idea of rearming Japan with atomic weapons.
But they know how to make nukes, right?
How many can they build per year?
Atomic bombs are old technology, and data about the first bombs are so easy to find that pretty much any fringe group with web access and some money could probably build one - if they had the uranium or plutonium, of course (hydrogen bombs are another matter entirely).
Regarding Japan, they actually do have all the reprocessing capacity needed to build atomic bombs
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/japan/nuke.htm
If they decide to go nuclear, I think the time needed would be measured in weeks rather than months. Days or even hours if they have prepared the move in advance, and with neighbours like North Korea... I would bet they have. Regarding the number of weapons they could build, I would assume they could become very swiftly the third atomic power; overtaking Russia would be far more difficult.
Now, the Japanese would need to develop a working, reliable missile (unless they bought them off the shelf from some other country) which is probably quite tougher than building the bomb. And in all probability a submarine to deploy them would take even longer.
Quote from: Alatriste on May 21, 2009, 01:09:30 AM
Now, the Japanese would need to develop a working, reliable missile (unless they bought them off the shelf from some other country) which is probably quite tougher than building the bomb.
On the other hand, given the Japanese skill at precision engineering and more importantly their significant space industry, I would imagine that their lack of experience in this area is somewhat overstated.
Quote from: Valmy on May 20, 2009, 12:56:12 PM
Replace 'the West' with 'England' and you have something very Wilhelmian: talking vaguely about being a strong and powerful country without any idea what exactly they want to do with their power.
I am somewhat annoyed they have the gall to accuse us of trying to "drag them down" when we have made them favored trading partners and such. Oh well.
Without changing a word, this sounds a lot like 1930s Japan.