Should your country boycott the Olympics?

[Ben Kenobi]

In the sense that how you wrote distorted the facts by implying no bibles were allowed in- yes, you were lying, you may not have intended it because you were upset- but yes you mispresented the facts earlier. Earlier you expressed upset that people couldn't bring in any bible, the truth is multiple bibles were prohibited.

True. There is a distinction, and I made sure to say what they said and why. Yes, China considers having two bibles an issue because of 'distribution'.

* Thus it does not trust these politically motivated Christians who come from outside.

No, it's quite a bit worse then this. Why would they care what Chinese people do inside their state? They would still be repression directed at the native Chinese.

* In the sense that if a Chinese person wants to go to mass somewhere, they are free to do so.

Are you even aware of the issues surrounding this statement? No. You are not free to just go to mass wherever you want. You are not free to have a bishop who is appointed by the pope. You are not free to go to mass outside of the state run institution.

* In the sense that you have a personal friend and want to discuss religion, you are free to do so.
* In the sense that China maintains personal rights to beliefs, this ban on extra bibles is fair, especially since the Olympics are supposed to be non-political.

If religion is a personal issue, the people should be permitted to bring as many bibles as they wish. Obviously, religion is a political issue for an atheist government, because it challenges their authority. The ban on extra bibles is not fair because it is a restriction on liberty and expression of religion, which is an essential part of religion. What use is it to have a faith if it's wrong to share what you believe? That's not religious freedom, that's repression pure and simple.

* It is certainly the right of a country to control the flow of documents it believes are subversive to the state.
* Now, is china overreacting- yes. Do I think that in a perfect world they should allow people to pass out bibles if they want, then yes- I accept free speech, but I certainly understand and respect the Chinese government's fear which is based on historical circumstances.

That's a cop out and you know it just as well as I do. Why should you 'respect' the chinese government for repressing their people, unless you sincerely believe they are doing the right thing in trying to crush Christianity.

I'm not certain you understand what I was getting at when I mentioned that. Or if you do, then I apologize because I don't understand how American Chinese people would necessarily have the same tendencies as Chinese-Chinese people.

Nationalism makes that question irrelevant. Why is Chinese nationalism restricted only to Chinese/Chinese people. Nationalism doesn't make that distinction, and makes the claim that the diaspora is an essential part of the whole (ie, one Chinese). No, they won't have the same tendencies, but if they are nationalists, that doesn't matter. They are Chinese, and thus their opinion must be taken into account.

While I have been emailed many anti-Tibet messages by American-Chinese friends, I still tend to think that the general nationalist tendencies are much stronger in China, and perhaps more disturbing than the ones you may have noted at a "Chinese martyr's parish" that is likely stocked with Chinese people who left the mainland before 1950.

The people who are the nationalists in the first place, which is why they left China. A nationalist government would have to accommodate these people which is why it would be much, much less radical and repressive.

Why should I- the fellow couldn't even speak Chinese and he was standing at a subway stop handing out little missionary tracts in English of all languages. He was foolish.

Does it answer my question as to who he was with? I'm curious.

Because that's the Chinese Psyche- to take these ideas and then go with them. Other revolts in Africa, have been led by charismatic leaders who claim to have been "touched by God" for example- religion is a very dangerous weapon. Honestly, China is a very strange place with very strange thinking- and it makes complete sense to most chinese people that religion is dangerous.

Chinese repression makes religion dangerous. Making someone a scapegoat of an entire range of your people is not conducive to avoiding revolution, especially when they are not responsible. All you have shown me here is that Christianity has been a part of China for a long time, so much so, like the Roman Emperors, the Chinese ones see it as profitable to call them scapegoats for their massive internal problems.

If they're just content with worshiping and keeping it private, the Chinese government doesn't have an issue.

I thought you said they were free to worship. Isn't that quite a fib? They are free to worship only if they don't do so openly is a huge restriction, and even then, they crack down on house churches.

Admittedly, the Chinese have restrictions on the licensing of Bishops in the Catholic Church, and on Protestant preachers as well- which I agree should not exist. However, they are understandable given China's history, and we can hope that as the Churches don't cause unrest and dissent and upset social stability that they can make a legitmate argument that they should have more autonomy.

Why? When have Catholics who have bishops invested by the Church been engaged in revolts against the Chinese government? All this is, is a desire to control the churches and make them bow to the head of the communist party.

There is no historical 'justification' for these actions, unless the desire for power counts as a justification.

Churches get cracked down on when they give trouble. If they can maintain their mission- which is to be nonpolitical- then they can exist. But churches ultimately are NOT apolitical- which is disturbing a la America's Jeremiah Wright style.

So if a church follows Christ's teachings, which ARE political, they are causing trouble for the government. If they choose to be a glee club and a meeting place they AREN'T political and they are ok? That is disturbing to me. The churches should be free to worship as they see fit regardless of whether it conforms to the vision of the party leaders.

Christianity came to china around 700 ad or so... Nestorian Christians, yes, I know. To a limited degree I've studied that as well as Matteo Ricci and the other Jesuit's arrival in China much later.

Yes, and tell me again how that means Christianity is a western invention. The west wasn't even around then.

China traditionally is a country without real religious belief. Oh, they've always believed in spirits, and even many atheists in china believe in spirits and the supernatural- but Confucianism and traditional Daoism were not religions. Later, both have sort of become semi-religious. And Buddhism is an imported religion from India.

China is historically an irreligious nation? That's not what I see. There is cause to call them historically religious. As you said so many of their internal problems seem to involve religion, so the question must be how can they be so irreligious and yet so afraid of religion. Obviously lots of people do worship and religion has a significant impact, otherwise this fear wouldn't exist.

And why is it contrary to the nationalism of China---> Catholics look to Rome for guidance, not Beijing. This undermines the state's authority.

And again, why should Chinese nationalists look to Beijing for inspiration?

Protestant ministers look to America, or Australia, or Europe for guidance, and often don't understand much about china. All they are concerned about is spreading their words.

Protestant CHINESE ministers don't care about China? You seem to see all religion as these white guys ordering Chinese people around. That's why I'm intrigued about this missionary encounter because it seems to conform with what you believe.

Well, there are violent tibetan monks and violent moslem uighurs and threatening falun gong practitioners. Is it so bizarre to assume that Christians could also have potential for unrest- especially considering the Polish Solidarity movement.

Solidarity wasn't 'violent' revolt, and neither was the Prague Spring. Just because one religion is violent does that mean all of them are?

China has not liked NGOs or any "second power" that could be used to oppose the government. Interestingly, the amount of NGOs has steadliy risen as the Chinese realize they NEED them to minister to their poor. Gradually, the churches can gain freedom- I am confident of that.

Why do they need to beg from the state for the freedom they are entitled? Does the state dole out certificates saying they can go pray now? I'm sorry but the state does not and should not have that authority.

I would also agree- if you argue it that in social realms, china is moving too slowly toward modernization. They keep telling excused that "china is different or special" or that "becuase china has so many people it cannot be like the west"- which is 75% crap.

Thank you! There is no reason why China is 'special' in this regard. Chinese people should have the same human rights as everyone else.

But it's understandable that they're afraid. The government doesn't want to end up like Louis XVI who granted rights then took them away- which led to unrest- WHICH is part of the reason why Tibet is right now such a powderkeg. Until ~2003 they were granted more religious freedom, then the government cracked down (for complicated reasons that were extremely foolish)

So it's better to deny the rights altogether and watch as the powderkeg explodes anyways? Poor logic.

Quite simply because a hypernationalist china would likely invade Japan. Chinese people hate Japan and want to teach them a lesson because their little brother is arrogant and hurt China. Remember the 2005 anti-Japanese riots, the government almost lost control of them as ranging groups of people actually turned over cars and set fire-- becuase the protests were joined by exploited migrant workers.

Fair enough. That would be a concern for me as well with a nationalist china. However for the chinese people themselves, why would a nationalist government be a bad thing?

A Hypernationalist China would not be a friend of the west and would likely persecute western religions even more- because evil westerners always tell lies about China and hurt it.

As opposed to a Communist China that hates the west, that persecutes Western religions because evil westerners always tell lies about it?

Seems like a very different China.

China has a lot of problems to fix. It is an industrial, and yet also a semi-feudal agrarian society. It's difficult to have stability with a democracy there- even the united states didn't have "full democracy" until the late 1800s. Initially the US didn't trust the non-landowning peasants to vote- how can the US expect other countries which lack so-called alleged "sophisticated" people to allow everyone to vote?

This argument was repeated in Japan, and in Germany especially, both nations that tried to play catch up. Industrialisation is not a quiet process! There is going to be upheaval. The difference is that the west had 300 years to work with. China has had maybe 60.

As for the Chinese plans, if they are looking at Serbia as their model, that tells you everything right there. They are not a superpower, and they have given themselves a small window of action. They are not in a good place right now, and if they start to feel hemmed in, we will get a war. We might get one anyways, as soon as they realise their best moment is now. All their plans are, they aren't playing in the right realm!

What the Chinese don't count on is the chinese force doctrine seems designed to : 1.) Overwhelm with massive deterrant force.... won't actually deter the Americans from responding. As Pearl Harbor demonstrated, Americans will respond. The Chinese really DO NOT REALIZE THIS because it's not how they think.

They will learn.

If China-US were to quarrel, the chinese strategy is to overwhelm US bases that are encircling their country- from the Central Asian bases, to Guam, to S. Korea, and Japan. they are willing to use limited nuclear delivery capability to destroy US battle groups if necessary.

Are they? If they nuke a carrier battle group, say goodbye China.

(Especially necessary probably since they currently lack the air power to do much.)

They don't even have the navy to cross to Taiwan.

But it's not obvious that the US could win. The US can't occupy China. The US probably can't even occupy Beijing unless it wants to kill a lot of people. No one would see the US as liberators.

The US will win and it won't be a contest.

Well, I'm glad you know the 20 year thing. Out of curiosity, where did you figure that out?

Demographics. I did a big paper contradicting the population control movement's analysis of the growth in world population. China is screwed. They have a massive neighbour who is growing faster and is wealthier.

Though between 2011-2025, an outside war might be sought as a "rallying effect" to bring the people together and make them forget about internal problems.

To be blunt after 2025, the Chinese will be older then we are. That is not a recipe for military expansion.

Honestly, I think the West should stay out of anything to do with Taiwan- but then again Chiense force strategy doesnt' seem to be for an amphibious invasion of the island. That's not really practical. China seems determined to win Taiwan's hearts and minds, or failing that, launch a denial strategy of missiles, air raids and sea blockade and cyberterror and economic warfare and get them to surrender before the US allies can arrive (and it will take days for US battlefleets to arrive.).

In other words they are still thinking too small.

The US has guarantees with Taiwan, and so long as the people of Taiwan are freer and more prosperous, then China will fail to attract them.

Well, they certainly could survive Christianity, but when the fundamentalist Koreans, for example, are considered- it's obvious why China doesn't want that sort of all-encompassing Christianity that challenges the cult of Mao and the cult of State-worship (which has been degrading a LOT in recent years). You live in Texas right? Look at the radical sects that exist there- the Branch Davidians, and the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints. the Chinese certainly don't want that.

That is a consequence of religious freedom. I don't wake up every day and say, gee, what are the Mormons going to do to me. I mean honestly, I have more to fear from the Spanish Inquisition.

[Barnabas]

Anybody knows what the Pope thinks of this?

Serious question, after all catholics are persecuted in China.

If I recall correctly, he thinks being confrontational with China is not a good thing.

[Barnabas]

By the way, The Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, is a state owned church, not the "real" catholic church.

Catholics in China are only free to go the the "state catholic church"

[Ben Kenobi]

Anybody knows what the Pope thinks of this?

Of the boycott, or the situation in general?

As far as I know he's not said one thing or another on this issue wrt the olympics.

He has confronted China, in appointing a new cardinal to represent the Catholic church, and he has been very outspoken on the overall issue.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Ben Kenobi
As Kidicious demonstrated, the ban isn't on personal bibles, it's on prostelyzing Jehovas' witnesses sorts of people.

You won't believe how ANGRY ordinary chinese people are at western media sources for "spreading these lies" (as contacts in China both Chinese and Foreign have told me). Ordinary Chinese people are extremely nationalist. (I recommend Peter Hay Gries' book "China's New Nationalism.)

Missionaries do practice in china, but they are generally registered and known by the government. For my part, I ran into several missionaries in Beijing and found it slightly upsetting, but then again, I dislike missionary activities.

China's history has led it to distrust these missionary influences. Why? 1852 Taiping Rebellion. pseudo-Christian anti-government rebellion. Then Colonizers attempted to get Chinese to accept their religions to pacify and exploit them. Also; 1980s Solidarity Movement in Poland--- led to fall of the Soviet Union... the Chinese see the Dalai Lama in an analogous position to John Paul II- for good reason.

Also, spiritual movements in China have often led to chaos- 1901 Boxer Rebellion, and other more ancient ones. More recently- the Falun Gong practitioners managed to sit nearly 10,000 people outside of Zhongnanhai- the seat of Chinese government, without anyone knowing about it in 1999!

This is not to say that religious suppression is good- but this is part of the reason why. The chinese government is deathly afraid of collapsing. It realizes it is on pins and needles... I would wager to say though that if it fell, the west would NOT like what replaces it- which would likely be a hyper-nationalist government.



This is very true. I agree with you that it is disgusting on the Chinese' part. However, how is the rest of the world supposed to "win" in this situation? China is in a relatively strong position. consider it like a pouty, mean United States crica 1920 in social development, but crica 1960 in terms of industrial and political international development.

I think it is unfair to hold it to a different standard than the colonial powers were held to. China is extremely racist and does want all other countries to kowtow to it. I think it will be a disaster for the world if China wins the most gold medals- the Chinese will become about as arrogant as the Germans during World War II. It is VERY importnat to the chinese to demonstrate they are racially superior to everyone else. But the way these boycots etc are carried out are not helping the situation- they are causing the chinese to dig in stronger and stronger.

The Chinese psyche is through the backdoor. In the past, political dissidents have been arrested through personal favors to Presidents and foreigners. The ones that made the biggest news stories and were the most humilitaing, often were not released on time, etc. Democracy Wall advocate Wei Jinsheng was a bit of an anomaly, but remember, he was extradited after the SECOND time he was imprisoned.

There are many problems with China, I admit, and if you like I will be glad to discuss them in another post, however, China and the reasons its leadership and its people act some ways are often misunderstood, so please understand that is the sense in which I am generally writing right now.


Slowwhand, it's complicated. The way China is portrayed in the media is not really how it is over there. The West often doesn't understand China. For example, I had to write to the Wall Street Journal for a correction because they screwed up in an article about China- they printed the correction (they listed a city as being in Tibet that was over 900 miles away from the province... it's a long story and the mistake was semi-reasonable but demonstrated that they rely on the wrong (biased) sources or mishear things.)

China, I think, can best be described as a Libertarian Police State. As long as you have money, or connections you can do whatever the hell you want... But if you challenge the government or stability (defined rather broadly... it's impossible to criticize the leaders)- then things are going to go very poorly for you.

----
Finally, FYI- I lived for over a year in China, and will probably be living there again sometime soon. My schooling also focused on Chinese Politics and Civil Society. (appeal to authority )

A lot of the anger on both sides comes from how different each sides values are. The "west" values human rights. And the Chinese value social stability. Certainly, both sides see the importance of each, it's just that they feel that one is far more important than the other. So there's bound to be conflict.

Eventually, China will have to realize that it is one country in a big world. I expect it to do so at about the same time the US does. In the mean time, the rest of the world has to get used to a new big player who follows much different rules than before.

Darkcloud, what part of China did you live in?

[DaShi]

Demographics. I did a big paper contradicting the population control movement's analysis of the growth in world population. China is screwed. They have a massive neighbour who is growing faster and is wealthier.

India? India is not growing faster than China nor is it wealthier. A closer look shows that India isn't really the competitor to China that it has been made out to be. Nor does India want to be. India would be happiest if it was just left alone. It has no desire to go out seeking trouble.

[Kuciwalker]

A lot of the anger on both sides comes from how different each sides values are. The "west" values human rights. And the Chinese value social stability. Certainly, both sides see the importance of each, it's just that they feel that one is far more important than the other. So there's bound to be conflict.

False dichotomy. I suspect the US has more social stability than China right now.

[DaShi]

Good, because that not what I was talking about.

[DarkCloud]

Dear Ben,

Hi. I'll get back to responding at length a little later (I lack some time right now.) Thanks for the response and I apologize for the remark about the missionary. It came across to me that you were trying to insult me when you asked me "Gosh, you were accosted by a missionary, I bet you couldn't even tell me who he was with.."

I don't know who he was with. I can speculate, but admittedly I felt a bit offended seeing him doing what he was doing. He was obviously Christian, though, and Protestant. But I will admit again, I have a negative view of missionaries that at times borders on almost irrational and it is uncalled for when I allow that to affect my responses. However, the irrational anti-missionary feeling is informed by logical, rational reasons.

DaShi

Eventually, China will have to realize that it is one country in a big world. I expect it to do so at about the same time the US does. In the mean time, the rest of the world has to get used to a new big player who follows much different rules than before.

I hope that too. It's interesting, many of the same things that the US and western nations did in the past- the semi-colonialism, the funding and propping up of dictators like China in a way does in Sudan, were OK in the past because the West was doing it. (Guatemala 1954, Batista in Cuba, etc.)

But now China is seen as a demon because it is merely selling arms to Sudan? (Which provides it with needed oil... the more oil on the market, the cheaper oil is for americans.) I feel upset at this double-standard. In fact, China is smart for selling to Sudan and the US would be foolish to pursue that issue too strongly.

Africa is gradually seeing China's new colors as a modern-colonialst in Africa- it imports its own workers, extracts wealth, and does little to directly improve African lives- even with its million dollar infrastructure projects. Also, China will eventually get burned by corrupt african governments. It will learn its lesson.

A lot of the anger on both sides comes from how different each sides values are. The "west" values human rights. And the Chinese value social stability. Certainly, both sides see the importance of each, it's just that they feel that one is far more important than the other. So there's bound to be conflict.

DaShi, I certainly agree. In Chinese schools, it's really odd. In their law schools, for example, they teach that China is different for imprisoning 90% of the accused... and the Chinese lawyers know that the west only imprisons around 60% (IIRC)... and they are a little ashamed, but are taught that for China to retain stability, the change needs to be gradual.

the educated Chinese at least do know about the western human rights, they just choose to interperet them differently. In some ways, it's odd, Chinese know (if not understand) what Westerners think more than Westerners know what Chinese think.

It frustrates me to see them move so slow on some reforms... But they are right when they say if they reform very fast or in the wrong way, things could go very wrong-- look what happened to Russia after De-sovietification.

Darkcloud, what part of China did you live in?

I lived in Beijing. I also (for fun) did a 2 1/2 week silk road trip from Xi'an to Urumqi (and went to "little tibet"- Xiahe- which is recently in the news- in Gansu province.). I also did a 2 1/2 week trip in Yunnan province- travelling from Kunming to Xishuangbanna, Dali, and Shangri-La.

During my time in the country, I spent nights sleeping in the homes of Uighurs, Tibetans, the Dai people, and a few other groups. And I managed to stay in hotels ranging from **** stars to ** star hotels that probably would merit zero in the West.

I've also been to Chengdu, Chongqing, Jinan, Qufu (Confucius' hometown), Mt. Taishan, and beautiful Guilin&Yangshuo (of course ), among other places.

Have you had an opportunity to visit the country?

[DaShi]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
the educated Chinese at least do know about the western human rights, they just choose to interperet them differently. In some ways, it's odd, Chinese know (if not understand) what Westerners think more than Westerners know what Chinese think.

It frustrates me to see them move so slow on some reforms... But they are right when they say if they reform very fast or in the wrong way, things could go very wrong-- look what happened to Russia after De-sovietification.

I met many people there who were well aware of the problems in their country but felt powerless to do anything. I'd like to see more freedom of speech there so that these people could more easily voice their opinions. It would certainly be better than the current method of protesting.

Then again, Mao allowed a period where people could freely voice their complaints. He quickly shut it down after it became overwhelmed and much of what people said was later used against them in the Cultural Revolution. So that path to liberal democracy is indeed not easy for China.

I lived in Beijing. I also (for fun) did a 2 1/2 week silk road trip from Xi'an to Urumqi (and went to "little tibet"- Xiahe- which is recently in the news- in Gansu province.). I also did a 2 1/2 week trip in Yunnan province- travelling from Kunming to Xishuangbanna, Dali, and Shangri-La.

During my time in the country, I spent nights sleeping in the homes of Uighurs, Tibetans, the Dai people, and a few other groups. And I managed to stay in hotels ranging from **** stars to ** star hotels that probably would merit zero in the West.

I've also been to Chengdu, Chongqing, Jinan, Qufu (Confucius' hometown), Mt. Taishan, and beautiful Guilin&Yangshuo (of course ), among other places.

Have you had an opportunity to visit the country?

I lived in Hangzhou for about 3 1/2 years. Yet my Chinese is still terrible. I'm taking classes for it now. I haven't spent as much time in the countryside. I've been to most of the major either in a tour group or visitiing friends.

I have been to Chengdu to see Jiuzaigou. That was an interesting trip in the middle of January. I was the only foreigner on small ricketty tour bus (without heat) travelling along mountsides covered with ice while listening to blaring bubblegum pop. Fortunately, the guy who arranged the trip for me let me borrow one of those big green communist party military coats to keep warm. That must have been a site for the Chinese travelling with me. It was a brutal trip because of the landscape and the weather, but I'm really glad that I went.

After I finish my masters degree in public health, I hope to return to work there. If possible, I'll probably try to go back next summer to work on my thesis.

[DarkCloud]

DaShi

I'd like to see more freedom of speech there so that these people could more easily voice their opinions. It would certainly be better than the current method of protesting.

I agree. It's even in their constitution. Free Speech is guaranteed in china... except it isn't. This leads to pent up rage and tension. Problem is, the government has most of the chips(power), so there's not a hell lot the citizens can do. bu hao yisi.

DaShi- Gotcha. So you probably have more direct practical experience in the country than myself. Did you ever visit Urban Ranger in Shanghai while you were there?

Brave man to take a chinese-led tour. I went on several foreigner-led tours, and organized my own tour (during national day I led 3 friends on a wild and wondrous excursion)- I'm sure you know from experience how crazy travelling during national day break is. But everything worked out. The people who went on the chinese-led tours had some very bizarre tales to tell.

Good luck on your master's.

[Blake]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
The Olympics should be above politics.

Everything should be above politics.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Are you even aware of the issues surrounding this statement? No. You are not free to just go to mass wherever you want. You are not free to have a bishop who is appointed by the pope. You are not free to go to mass outside of the state run institution.

If religion is a personal issue, the people should be permitted to bring as many bibles as they wish. Obviously, religion is a political issue for an atheist government, because it challenges their authority. The ban on extra bibles is not fair because it is a restriction on liberty and expression of religion, which is an essential part of religion. What use is it to have a faith if it's wrong to share what you believe? That's not religious freedom, that's repression pure and simple.

That's a cop out and you know it just as well as I do. Why should you 'respect' the chinese government for repressing their people, unless you sincerely believe they are doing the right thing in trying to crush Christianity.

1.) Because every government has always "repressed" its people in some fashion. Heavens, people complain about how "evil" america is every day. I personally think America is currently the best place to live in the world (why I currently do not reside in Norway or China.) 2.) As DaShi stated in agreement, stability trumps all in China- nothing is more important. Even regular chinese people will agree with that. I will agree that Some will say religion isn't destabilizing, but others- the great majority- will.

Nationalism makes that question irrelevant. Why is Chinese nationalism restricted only to Chinese/Chinese people. Nationalism doesn't make that distinction, and makes the claim that the diaspora is an essential part of the whole (ie, one Chinese). No, they won't have the same tendencies, but if they are nationalists, that doesn't matter. They are Chinese, and thus their opinion must be taken into account.

Here, I'll give you a sample of how that argument can be twisted:
"Our brothers who have been brainwashed by the Westerners, must be liberated by the Chinese Republic."

there, that completely disregards anything that their "brothers" in foreign lands think.

The people who are the nationalists in the first place, which is why they left China. A nationalist government would have to accommodate these people which is why it would be much, much less radical and repressive.

Chiang Kai-Shek's government was one of the evilest in the world in terms of corruption and persecution of its people. It ruled like much of the kleptocratic African dictatorships currently do. Indeed, just like the corrupt african despots- Chiang was a Christian! There is a reason that the people chose Mao over Jiang Jieshi (chiniese name for Kai-Shek). The Communists did good works in the community, they did not steal from the people, they did not flood a bridge that killed thousands of chinese, they helped rebuild the country, they destroyed the farms of exploitative landlords.

The nationalists were not good people- and I think any native Taiwanese person can agree with that statement. Jieshi ruled Taiwan as a dictator until his son Jiang Ching-Quo passed on the torch.

I admit, I am not a Taiwan expert- but I know that much.

Chinese repression makes religion dangerous. Making someone a scapegoat of an entire range of your people is not conducive to avoiding revolution, especially when they are not responsible. All you have shown me here is that Christianity has been a part of China for a long time, so much so, like the Roman Emperors, the Chinese ones see it as profitable to call them scapegoats for their massive internal problems.

I thought you said they were free to worship. Isn't that quite a fib? They are free to worship only if they don't do so openly is a huge restriction, and even then, they crack down on house churches.

Yes. free to worship privately, not publicly. It's very different from in the west. I admit, some restrictions need to be eased, but the chinese people will certainly take any easing of restrictions farther than you can ever imagine. China is a bizarre country. Every day I lived there I saw something utterly ridiculous or crazy or something I would never have thought of before. I counsel caution in proposing that "Chinese have to do this a certain way."

I think that the most important thing is to fix the chinese legal system so that people have a good way to redress their problems as DaShi stated. After that, the constitution can be enforced. Right now, if alternative points of power exist nad the constitution isn't enforced, even more protests will happen- which will harm economic growth and the standard of living and possibly lead to chaos.

So yes, I agree with you that china's treatment of religion is unfair and not fully respecting of people's autonomy. However, granting freedom of religion will not necessarily raise quality of life and may instead lead to greater conflict.

Why? When have Catholics who have bishops invested by the Church been engaged in revolts against the Chinese government? All this is, is a desire to control the churches and make them bow to the head of the communist party.

Well yes, of course. I don't deny that. It's quite obvious.

So if a church follows Christ's teachings, which ARE political, they are causing trouble for the government. If they choose to be a glee club and a meeting place they AREN'T political and they are ok? That is disturbing to me. The churches should be free to worship as they see fit regardless of whether it conforms to the vision of the party leaders.

Oh heavens, the Catholic Church repudiated Liberation Theology in the 1990s. It's not supposed to make political statements any more since that leads to corruption in the church and to consolidation of bad powers.

Yes, and tell me again how that means Christianity is a western invention. The west wasn't even around then.

But it is a western invention- the protestant path has many very western ideas in it, and the evangelical path with its beliefs in certain types of "human rights" and certain "good" and "bad" things are very much informed by an Eurocentric worldview.

China is historically an irreligious nation? That's not what I see. There is cause to call them historically religious. As you said so many of their internal problems seem to involve religion, so the question must be how can they be so irreligious and yet so afraid of religion. Obviously lots of people do worship and religion has a significant impact, otherwise this fear wouldn't exist.

I guess there's a difference between the two if you see some religions as cults (charismatic politicised leader) versus philosophies and moral codes. China has a lot of the latter... The former crop up from time to time to fill gaps in people's lives. The Cult of Mao for example filled something missing in people's lives. Emotional people need something to look up to that can give them guidance and which is greater than them- and that thing is often religion... and a politicized religion can easily motivate the peasant class to rise up and change things.

And again, why should Chinese nationalists look to Beijing for inspiration?

They don't look to the Communist Party. In actual chinese discourse there are often many complaints that the Chinese government isn't going far enough. For example, the goverment had to defuse the 2005 protests and the 1999 protests.

Even just reading the TIME China Blog replies, you can see the vitriol expressed by real chinese people against westerners... and these are chinese who speak and understand english. On the actual chinese forums- they refer to westerners as worse, even when criticizing their government for not standing up to foreigners enough.

Solidarity wasn't 'violent' revolt, and neither was the Prague Spring. Just because one religion is violent does that mean all of them are?

Solidarity led to the fall of the government. Therefore, the Chinese are right to fear a similar situation based on historical facts.

Fair enough. That would be a concern for me as well with a nationalist china. However for the chinese people themselves, why would a nationalist government be a bad thing?

A bad thing mainly in the sense that it would probably end up like Russia in the Yeltsin period in terms of internal unrest and corruption, but in the Putin era of national chauvinism and aggression. The chinese people would not necessarily be better off. For example- Chiang Kai-Shek's feudal government exploited the people... I see no difference in a neo-nationalist government.

Minorities in China would be much oppressed if that was the case. Currently, China is one of the few countries that celebrates its minorities. It also allows them to have more than one child. Minorities possess many rights that ordinary Han Chinese lack. However, and it is true, there is severe religious persecution of Moslems and to a lesser degree, the Tibetan Buddhists- because religion is seen as a threat.

As opposed to a Communist China that hates the west, that persecutes Western religions because evil westerners always tell lies about it?

Seems like a very different China.

If you do go to china, you see interesting things. One friend warned me that "you can almost always say two contradictory things about china and both of them be true." In this sense- if you go to china, you can see they worship the west... but are jealous. They see all the science and technology and richness and think that they deserve it. They want it. American music and movies are wildly popular in china. American (and to a lesser degree some European) movie and tv stars are popular, and they turn out in droves when high level american officials come.

The communist party realizes it needs the west. A nationalist government might not be so reasonable. It might think that all it needs is China.

We might get one anyways, as soon as they realise their best moment is now. All their plans are, they aren't playing in the right realm!

We will see. But the chinese are smart in a way that bush hasn't been. They've been cultivating allies- the Iranians, the Russians. At some point they will feel they can pull something off depending on certain goals. And that will be the day the benefits outweigh the risks.

Are they? If they nuke a carrier battle group, say goodbye China.

I have no doubt that will be the american sentiment. But can you imagine the international sentiment if in return for the Chinese attacking ONLY combatant sailors, the americans destroy bejing with a nuclear warhead. I know I for one would not support that- that is unconscionable and disproportional and as a christian I am shocked that you would be willing to respond in such a way. To do that would not be part of Just War theory.

They don't even have the navy to cross to Taiwan.

They do and they don't. As I said, they don't appear to be planning for a ground invasion. I think they realize that isn't feasable. They don't have the capacity for it and Taiwan's beaches and the strait are inhospitable.

Demographics. I did a big paper contradicting the population control movement's analysis of the growth in world population. China is screwed. They have a massive neighbour who is growing faster and is wealthier.

To be blunt after 2025, the Chinese will be older then we are. That is not a recipe for military expansion.

I wouldn't count on India. It's a wonder it isn't a complete basket-case. I credit Indian acceptance of poverty for their acceptance and stability.

And as I said, after 2025 it's likely that there's not much to worry about China... but it does have some destabilizing tendencies that can be projected outward: 1.) More males than females; 2.) a need for natural resources. 3.) even if it has 400 million elderly, it still has 800 million service-ready people... which is over twice the US population.

That is a consequence of religious freedom. I don't wake up every day and say, gee, what are the Mormons going to do to me.

Well yes, but that's a western concept. The East has been constantly used by missionaries for colonial purposes. Chinese aren't willing to live with those consequences... And indeed, have you ever seen what Falun Gong managed to do in china- that's very frightening. I can't say I'm too sympathetic toward that cult.

[Ben Kenobi]

1.) Because every government has always "repressed" its people in some fashion. Heavens, people complain about how "evil" america is every day. I personally think America is currently the best place to live in the world (why I currently do not reside in Norway or China.)

I agree, and I wish I were down in the US too.

2.) As DaShi stated in agreement, stability trumps all in China- nothing is more important. Even regular chinese people will agree with that. I will agree that Some will say religion isn't destabilizing, but others- the great majority- will.

Koreans value stability and see Christianity as a part of of stability, so it's not enough to say that suspicion of religion is a reaction to colonialism. It's a facile assessment.

Here, I'll give you a sample of how that argument can be twisted:
"Our brothers who have been brainwashed by the Westerners, must be liberated by the Chinese Republic."

there, that completely disregards anything that their "brothers" in foreign lands think.

What concepts does a nationalist Chinese republic touch upon? I don't believe the republicans inside China would see their brothers abroad as enemies, rather as kindred.

Chiang Kai-Shek's government was one of the evilest in the world in terms of corruption and persecution of its people.

The concept of a national and republican China doesn't begin with Chiang Kai Shek.

It ruled like much of the kleptocratic African dictatorships currently do. Indeed, just like the corrupt african despots- Chiang was a Christian! There is a reason that the people chose Mao over Jiang Jieshi (chiniese name for Kai-Shek). The Communists did good works in the community, they did not steal from the people, they did not flood a bridge that killed thousands of chinese, they helped rebuild the country, they destroyed the farms of exploitative landlords.

So a good communism is better then a good republic? All this says is that good communism is better then a bad republic.

The nationalists were not good people- and I think any native Taiwanese person can agree with that statement. Jieshi ruled Taiwan as a dictator until his son Jiang Ching-Quo passed on the torch.

The ones I have spoken too, have a different assessment of the whole issue, they see themselves as a beacon of light to China as a whole, rightly or wrongly.

Yes. free to worship privately, not publicly. It's very different from in the west. I admit, some restrictions need to be eased, but the chinese people will certainly take any easing of restrictions farther than you can ever imagine. China is a bizarre country. Every day I lived there I saw something utterly ridiculous or crazy or something I would never have thought of before. I counsel caution in proposing that "Chinese have to do this a certain way."

I've not been there so I cannot comment on this point. I do understand the desire for stability. Heck the whole concept of the Heavenly Gate is that stability was a blessing from God.

So yes, I agree with you that china's treatment of religion is unfair and not fully respecting of people's autonomy. However, granting freedom of religion will not necessarily raise quality of life and may instead lead to greater conflict.

Yes, conflict, but you don't give people freedom to improve their quality of life. They have freedom and you can only take it away.

Oh heavens, the Catholic Church repudiated Liberation Theology in the 1990s. It's not supposed to make political statements any more since that leads to corruption in the church and to consolidation of bad powers.

I'm not talking liberation theology. I'm talking about simple concepts like love your neighbour, and do good to the one who attacks you. These ARE political, in the sense that they offer instruction on how people should act with one another.

But it is a western invention- the protestant path has many very western ideas in it, and the evangelical path with its beliefs in certain types of "human rights" and certain "good" and "bad" things are very much informed by an Eurocentric worldview.

To a certain extent, but this hasn't stopped the Koreans from embracing Christianity in all forms.

I guess there's a difference between the two if you see some religions as cults (charismatic politicised leader) versus philosophies and moral codes. China has a lot of the latter...

I don't draw a distinction. Confucianism offers insight into the way people should live, and implies a spiritual side of men alongside the physical. I believe it should qualify as religious.

Even just reading the TIME China Blog replies, you can see the vitriol expressed by real chinese people against westerners... and these are chinese who speak and understand english. On the actual chinese forums- they refer to westerners as worse, even when criticizing their government for not standing up to foreigners enough.

Good. I think China should have the sense of confidence that other nations do in ruling and governing themselves.

A bad thing mainly in the sense that it would probably end up like Russia in the Yeltsin period in terms of internal unrest and corruption, but in the Putin era of national chauvinism and aggression. The chinese people would not necessarily be better off. For example- Chiang Kai-Shek's feudal government exploited the people... I see no difference in a neo-nationalist government.

Oh, I don't believe in the short run that they would be better off, I expect that the would be worse off for the first few years. But after that things would improve.

Minorities in China would be much oppressed if that was the case. Currently, China is one of the few countries that celebrates its minorities.

Seems some disconnection here. How can they tolerate minorities when they are persecuting christians and buddhists?

It also allows them to have more than one child.

Ahh ok. That's only in rural areas I believe

If you do go to china, you see interesting things. One friend warned me that "you can almost always say two contradictory things about china and both of them be true." In this sense- if you go to china, you can see they worship the west... but are jealous. They see all the science and technology and richness and think that they deserve it. They want it. American music and movies are wildly popular in china. American (and to a lesser degree some European) movie and tv stars are popular, and they turn out in droves when high level american officials come.

They do deserve the same freedoms and prosperity as the west, but they wont get there under the current administration.

We will see. But the chinese are smart in a way that bush hasn't been. They've been cultivating allies- the Iranians, the Russians. At some point they will feel they can pull something off depending on certain goals. And that will be the day the benefits outweigh the risks.

What about India?

I have no doubt that will be the american sentiment. But can you imagine the international sentiment if in return for the Chinese attacking ONLY combatant sailors, the americans destroy bejing with a nuclear warhead.

An unprovoked nuclear launch on anyone would receive this response from the US. It doesn't matter if they were a battle group in the middle of the pacific or an american city. Lauching a nuclear weapon against the US will provoke a hard reaction. I honestly don't see much international outcry that wouldn't already be provoked with any response the US makes.

I know I for one would not support that- that is unconscionable and disproportional and as a christian I am shocked that you would be willing to respond in such a way. To do that would not be part of Just War theory.

Well, I'm a pacifist. Just because I think the response will be in this way doesn't mean I condone or approve of the attack.

I wouldn't count on India. It's a wonder it isn't a complete basket-case. I credit Indian acceptance of poverty for their acceptance and stability.

India is a counterweight and balance for China. Currently their incomes are rising faster and they will soon have a larger labour force.

And as I said, after 2025 it's likely that there's not much to worry about China... but it does have some destabilizing tendencies that can be projected outward: 1.) More males than females; 2.) a need for natural resources. 3.) even if it has 400 million elderly, it still has 800 million service-ready people... which is over twice the US population.

These destabilizing features are all additional reasons why I don't believe the status quo will work.

Well yes, but that's a western concept. The East has been constantly used by missionaries for colonial purposes. Chinese aren't willing to live with those consequences... And indeed, have you ever seen what Falun Gong managed to do in china- that's very frightening. I can't say I'm too sympathetic toward that cult.

I don't see Falun Gong as a western body, that to me seems a strange perspective. As for Christianity, there is no reason why it couldn't fit with China. There is nothing explicitly nationalist about Christianity. It goes with everything so to speak.

Compare it with Islam. Christianity prints chinese bibles so that people can read the bible in their own language. It may historically have a colonial past, but that is not core to what Christianity is about.

[Wezil]

DarkCloud - You have trashed Falun Gong twice now by my count. Can you elaborate on this "dangerous cult" please? It appears their greatest sin is being more popular than the CCP.