Hurling shoes, pt. II

[MrFun]

And the best way to get them to change their ways, is to act like an uncivilized idiot as well, so that they see how stupid they are being and promise to act better...

You're seeing the light!

[Imran Siddiqui]

qft!

So when are you going to start throwing your shoes at Obama?

[Alinestra Covelia]

BBC article on the Chinese response, which is indignant: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7866636.stm

This is interesting, it shows that the Chinese were fairly amused when it happened to somebody else, but went all-out batguano crazy when it happened to them.

Maybe there's hope for a US-China rapprochement yet. The two sides appear to be pretty similar in many ways.

[Zkribbler]

Except the Chinese shoot peaceful protestors. We simply put them on the "Don't Fly" list because they're terrorists.

[BeBMan]

Just put the shoes on that list, problem gone

[Alinestra Covelia]

Except the Chinese shoot peaceful protestors.

We did too. Kent State Massacres. I'm not saying this to be flip about it. Both sides are capable of violations that should not have occurred in the first place. My point is that both sides have come through this and it's usually more effective to engage with the other side to bring about change, rather than just sit back and throw out derogatory criticisms.

While we're on the subject, I remember reading a content analysis of the suppression of student riots in Seoul way back in the 1950s, and comparing it against the 1989 Tiananmen riots. I may have the title somewhere. It was from Univerisity of Missouri Journalism School, if I recall correctly.

Long story short:

South Korea was a US ally - US media covered it from a pro-government viewpoint.

Communist China was not a US ally - US media covered it from an anti-government viewpoint.



I have no issue with pointing out flaws in the Chinese system. There are many Chinese liberal thinkers who agree with you and want to change the system for greater accountability and transparency.

But as long as outside commentators seem blind to their own systemic flaws, the Chinese gov't can easily play the hypocrisy card and weaken such calls for improvement and change.

[duke o' york]

Just put the shoes on that list, problem gone

Yeah, you don't get these problems in a mosque. How civilised.

[Elok]

Okay, I've looked up both incidents on Wikipedia (if its accounts are inaccurate, tell me), and the events don't seem comparable.

Kent State: Almost forty years ago, National Guard called in to disperse a crowd of protesters who got unruly. Protesters began chucking rocks at National Guard, who then resorted to tear gas (ineffectual due to wind). Protesters were eventually driven out of the square by an advance with bayonets. What made them shoot is unclear; apparently the guards freaked out or lost their tempers or something. Opened fire on protesters, killing four, permanently injuring one (paralysis) and inflicting lesser injuries on several others. Followed by widespread nationwide outrage and swift official condemnation.

Tiananmen Square: Large protest sparked by death of an activist about twenty years ago. Reputedly peaceful; Wiki says a few even helped the authorities apprehend some thugs who were vandalizing a portrait of Mao. Refused to disperse, but no mention of violent resistance at first. Started a hunger strike instead. PRC government consulted over a period of days and decided to quell the protest by force. Tanks rolled in, we know what happened next. Estimates of casualties range from 200 (low end of PRC's figures) to 3000 (high end of Chinese Red Cross's). Many protesters still in detention to this day. Government censors all discussion of the event and refuses to apologize.

It's a bit of a stretch to call the two equivalent.

[DaShi]

Welcome to the big leagues China. You'll need thicker skin if you want to survive.

[DaShi]

Oh, and I'm annoyed with both China's and Bush's responses. I wanted Bush to appear to be the snarling immature baby, while China was the one who took it in stride.

[Alinestra Covelia]

It's a bit of a stretch to call the two equivalent.

I agree with you and I wouldn't call them equivalent. I think the events are similar from a purely qualitative viewpoint, but as you rightly point out, the US gov't has made reparations and its conduct has largely healed the wounds.

My point is more that all governments stumble on the path towards justice. China's missteps in its handling of the 1989 incident is something to draw comment and criticism. But the most effective criticism is that which comes from the angle of: "we've made similar errors and found a better way of dealing with it - here's our findings".

The Chinese government has played the nationalism card in its arguments to draw attention away from its own shortcomings. A more engagement-based discussion tends to work better than a more condemnatory tone, because it does blunt the nationalism card.


I think your characterization of Tiananmen vs. Kent State is pretty accurate.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Welcome to the big leagues China. You'll need thicker skin if you want to survive.

Wait, I thought that protesting over minutiae was a sign that you'd made it to the big time?

[Elok]

So you're saying we should draw parallels between KS and TS during diplomatic talks with China, is that right? Are you sure that wouldn't come across as patronizing?

[Alinestra Covelia]

I think my post is meant more in the vein of "if you're a Poly poster and China's gov't really offends you, here's an alternative viewpoint that may explain (even if it doesn't excuse) their behavior".

That's probably the best way I can put it.

[Alinestra Covelia]

One thing I am certain about is that China's government right now is trying out various statutory measures (and borrowing fairly openly from civil code countries, especially France and Germany, as I understand it) to come up with a functional legal and legislative system.

Even the regional governments along the coast are taking inspiration from many more market-oriented nations to improve their systems, although there is still a massive problem with region-vs-region rent seeking behavior.

The Chinese gov't is not a monolithic bugbear. It's an institution that is trying very hard to reform itself so that its economy will continue to grow. It's an institution that also is politically interested in self-preservation. That will clash with its economic liberalization. But these are problems that all western governments have faced, and have survived, with different methods.

The last time China turned its back on the world was a loss for them and for the outside world both. I don't advocate unilateral concessions to reward inefficient government, but I don't subscribe to a unilateral opposition to them either, given their quiet but earnest attempts to modernize.