At 10:19 AM 6/21/01 -0700 Christopher Gwyn wrote:
> Let's clarify a few things:
> Your statement that "we don't know how *they* really think" sounds
>to me as if it is saying that - by virtue of being 'Chinese' -
>Chinese thought is 'inscrutable', that there is something different
>about being Chinese that impedes comprehending 'their' thought that
>does not occur with the various cultures, political systems, and
>genotypes available in the other 75% of the world.
Well, let's clarify this further by going back to the original proposition:
Kristin Ruhle suggested that: "(the conservative viewpoint
tends to take *pride* in emphasizing so called American values) when
AMerica has only five percent of the world's billions (Does that mean 95
percent of the planet is, well, Un-AMerican? Not necessarily undeomcratic,
but UN-AMERICAN! horrors!)"
I replied that we have no idea whether or not the Chinese share American
values, as their opinions are inscrutable.
Given that the context of the discussion clearly concerns nations, and not
races, I don't know how any interpretation other than "political system" is
possible.
> Given your reply I now assume that your
>remark was not about 'Chinese' in general, but about citizens or
>people within territory controlled by the People' Republic of China.
Bingo.
>However I don't see any additional interpretations of your statement
>than the two I described above. Therefore a few questions to see if
>clarification will present me with other interpretations for your
>statement -
Do you have any idea how incredibly demeaning these questions are? Just
to show that I play nice, however, I'll answer them - but I am *shocked*
that you somehow found these questions necessary.
For the rest of you who found these questions as irrelevant as I did, feel
free to stop reading now.
> 1.) Do you agree or disagree that citizens of the People's Republic
>of China are all - each and every one of them - fully human in all
>respects?
Agree.
> 1A.) If you do agree that '*they*' are 'fully human', and therefore
>'think like everyone else', then why do you suggest that "we don't
>know how *they* really think"?
The People's Republic of China is very efficient in preventing the free
expression of opinions by the vast majority of their 1 billion + citizens.
For example, anybody know what the approval rating of Jiang Zemin is?
> 2.) I fully agree that people in territory controlled by the
>People's Republic of China are often repressed in a variety of ways -
>ways that I deem unacceptable. How do you get from that shared
>premise to "basic inability to even express opinions"? (i completely
>agree that expressing an opinion significantly at odds with the
>various power structures in the People's Republic of China can be
>financially, medically, and socially dangerous (or worse) - but it is
>a far cry from being unable to safely express a 'dissident' opinion
>to having a "basic inability to even express opinions". hmmmm.... or
>- i think this is unlikely, but i would like to be able to dismiss
>the possibility - do you feel that being repressed makes someone
>'sub-human' and therefore not really deserving of consideration?)
Having talked with some citizens of the PRC in the past, I have found that
their viewpoints on most political subjects are inscrutable. The matter,
to them, was simply taboo.
Thus, making any characterization of the viewpoints of the world's people
on a matter like American values should note that the viewpoints of 25% of
the world's people, are, by definition, unknown on this subject.
> 3.) Why do you find it depressing that someone would assert that
>citizens of the People's Republic of China are as human as the rest
>of us? (surely such a postulate would, in your eyes, justify
>agitating for their having rights and freedoms at least as good as
>what '*we*' rightfully enjoy?)
This is where you REALLY piss me off. This question is copmletely
predicated on an answer of *yes* to question #1, and if you already know
the answers to your questions, why are you asking them?
I feel like the average defendent in a Chinese Court right now - apparently
the verdicts have already been written.
> 4.) What "vagaries of human opinion" are you referring to? (opinions
>expressed by citizens of the People's Republic of China - approved or
>disapproved of by the government of the People's Republic of China?
>Opinions expressed by people who disagree with you? Your own
>opinions?)
None of the above.
I was referring to the broad array of human opinions which makes the
opinions of, as you put it, "every other human" hard to tell.
> 4A.) Do you feel that opinions expressed by people in territory
>controlled by the People's Republic of China are not genuine opinions
>if the expression of those opinions is being allowed by the
>government or if they agree with a government position?
The opinions are valid if allowed by the government. I would certainly
accept the opinion of a PRC citizen on the day's weather.
There is no way of knowing if an opinion expressed by a citizen of the PRC
that agrees with the official government position is genuine or coerced to
some degree.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
