lexico said:
Again you failed to read the conclusion of the text,
No, I did not. The comparisons were only made with non-democracies.
Appearently 'murder figures' for the democracies are never avaliable. The japanese interned in american camps during the war must have died of sadness, the boers interned into British concentration camps must have had a collective heart attack, and the indians basically decided to spontaneously move to the reservations and just vanish in large numbers.
Since the text clearly puts the Peoples' Republic of China below any democracy, it is plainly clear that any attempt China will do to call attention to the Japanese past will be immediately replied by the 'defenders of freedom' (read: people who live in the US and allied states) that China has commited many crimes and that, anyway, Japan has been a democracy [conveniently forgetting that the government party wins every election] for 60 years now and thus has a far better record than China.
In other words, until China is able to make its voice heard loud and clear, instead of letting the 'democracies' take over the lions' share of the media coverage of these incidents, then any attempt to call the westerners' attention to the Japanese past will be met instead with a barrage of criticism of China itself [which they percieve as a real threat, whereas Japan is not seen as such]. It is therefore conterproductive for now to bring up such issues to countries that did not experience a direct japanese occupation.
lexico said:
which said,Again you fail to distinquish the two distinct ideas of justice and profit, military might and exchange of goods, forgetting the past by the victimised and revising historical memory by the victimiser.
I read six ideas there... and justice is whatever the lawmakers decide it is. There is no such thing as 'Universal Justice', just the eyes of the viewer. Which is why you can, for example, do an abortion and still be a law-abiding and respected citizen in Spain and be arrested and treated as a criminal in the neighbouring country of Portugal for doing the exact same thing.
lexico said:
Does truth have any meaning to you?
"Truth"? If you compare most history books written 80 years ago with the modern ones, you'll notice that the "Truth", save for some names and dates - and sometimes not even that - has been in many cases changed almost beyond recognition by renewed 'interpretation'.
The "Truth" is always being rewritten by historians, so that the past can be seen with the eyes of today - for example, where once the Austro-Hungarian Empire was seen as a weak state due to its multi-ethnic compostion and an example of what should not be a country, today it is regarded as an example of civilization and liberties for a multicultural society, an example for modern Europe.
lexico said:
btw do you still hold that position with the Xinhua News Agency ?
Yes, currently my collaboration with the Peoples' Republic of China has been improving considerably, as my efforts to see that China recieves a well balanced view in the media that properly reflects the conditions and aspirations of modern China without any preconcieved bias, thus opening the way for a better understanding between China and the other nations, therefore creating finer opportunities for chinese operations abroad have been positively reviewed by Beijing, which in turn wisely saw fit to make an expanded use of my skills.
lexico said:
What happened to universal moral principles and regard for truth ? Does journalism not have any ethical standards on reporting ?
Try asking that to the american media, which has been doing its best to whitewash what took place in New Orleans and masking the full extent to which the United States lost control of its 'free, prosperous and happy population'.
lexico said:
While you seem to suggest that the PRC "should be careful" so as not to drive away any business it might get otherwise, I do not believe the investors of foreign countries are in much of a position as reducing costs and instability of returns from capital investment remains the major problem in the current dcowsizing, restructuring world of industry.
There is a great deal of misinformation and fear regarding China. The latest one being the attempt to block chinese textile products in the harbours of the 'free democracies' , despite the end of the quota system by the WTO. The strength of Chinas' negotiating position there strongly depends on its reputation - its detractor nations could, for example, say they are blocking the imports due to 'moral reasons', thus masking their fear of being surpassed by China. All efforts must go into denying them the ability to use any fallacious argument against China.
You may have noticed by now that I too, fight for truth. The difference is that I have a different approach to make sure that, at least, the ultimate effects of this truth carry the day, even if the words that say it do not.
lexico said:
I would also like to point out that a significant increase in private property will eventually, as is evident now, bring out greater freedom of expression as well as greater buying power as they go hand in hand.
That is a non-sequitur.
Firstly, there is ample freedom of expression in China now, with the exception of some selected political issues that would be used by outside powers and malignant people to upset and possibly block the prosperous road the chinese population is currently undertaking. It would also bring about unnecessary and false divisions between the population (like the major divide that has been happening in the US whenever they hold a presidential election).
Second, an increase of the prosperity of the individual brings about the desire for the continuation of that prosperity, and it is clear to all except the weak-minded and the malignant that anything that may bring upheaval to the society will disrupt the current prosperous tendencies. It is, therefore, by no means correct, nor logic, to assume that greater wealth by the chinese = more desire to bring about a foreign system into China (all the more because said system has clearly shown, in Japan, South Korea and Europe, to be quite unable to deliver continued prosperity to its populations. In the German case, for example, it is even a clear case of a system that promotes devisiveness and is unable to bring about a proper government).
lexico said:
I therefore find your vastly simplified perception of the PRC lacking in substance as well as deficient in presenting any positive ideas for change. The sad face of conservatism as you have amply shown on this forum shall serve as a warning for aging cultures that lack innovation in social perception, but societies live and evlove as the people do.
And I find your near-total ignorance of the proper realities of the PRC quite disturbing, clearly showing of a severe deficit of proper information can bring about a line of thought that can be extremely negative for all sides involved and posing even a very direct threat to the well-being of the population, as it shows that the dark face of 'change to fit the will and desires of foreign powers in order to keep the chinese population in eternal chains' is still present in many peoples' minds today. I am sorry, but the time of the unjust treaties is *over*. China will no longer bow to whatever the foreign powers want it to be.
lexico said:
Do you not trust the ability of PRC citizens to think as individuals, not subjected to ideological propaganda by the state ?
I daresay that the citizens of the PRC think both in individual terms and as chinese citizens. And the subjacent implication of your statement is that the chinese State is not doing its best to further the interests of China and of its population, something with which I totally disagree - and that the current rise in prosperity of the nation proves.
Regards,
Keoland
