This blogger pretty much sums up Chinese Nationalims for me. Rally to the flag at each insult.

B.:

Maybe, but I relate to his feelings about the Olympics and how it is getting dragged into everything from the air quality to Tibet to Sudan. Of course, many people expected exactly this.

But I am starting to agree with the sentiment expressed above:

"Fuck your mother! If you don't want to come, don't! If you don't want to participate, don't!"

You can't have Olympic glory without Olympic shit. Sorry China, but you're going to have to get used to this fact.

Wrong that it may be for the Western media to exaggerate the suppression in Tibet, in the end it's the Chinese who have the money, guns and numbers. The long-term injury done to the Tibetans has and will far outweigh the crimes Tibetans committed on March 14th, not to mention the criticism Westerners throw at China.

A quick postscript aimed at ESNW, if admin. would allow, since public commenting does not appear to be possible on ESNW:
Though you rightly accuse Western media of exaggeration, you also throw around the term "ethnic cleansing" rather lightly, given that the Tibetans are the ones threatened with becoming a minority in their own country (and probably already are in their own capital), don't have guns, don't have money and don't control the most populous nation on earth. Maybe on 3/14 the Tibetans were in the wrong- the rampaging ones anyway- but I find it hard to sympathize with the Chinese given that the CCP will exact its justice (vengeance?) in full, and then some. Except for last Friday, the Tibetans do not have the luxury of exacting justice- after all, they don't even have the luxury of speaking out.

i am wondering whether all of the visitors here can speak Chinese. i would like to suggest you guys surf the link here http://www.anti-cnn.com/

i love the program sexy beijing, i also appreciate the articles here for just translation.

however, some of the comments really disappointed me for the irresponsible information.

well, as a foreigner, any misunderstanding is acceptable.

it is really funny that many foreigners cares more on politics than us while we just cares about our life, you konw nowadays, the inflation really bothers us.

some problems originate from historical heritage. enjoy your days here, because there is no insult here which we chinese often meet in foreign countries.

"enjoy your days here, because there is no insult here which we chinese often meet in foreign countries."

樓上﹐真啼笑皆非。 難道你以為 Hello 族在大陸沒受騙 ﹐侮辱及歧視呢﹖除非身為外國人在大陸就無法體會這種普及偏見。

One interesting article from the Financial Times: West’s perception of Tibet angers Beijing click here

May be worth a read if you don't get the blogger. :)

Jeremy:

isn't the tendency to "drag[]" the Olympics into everything simply the inverse corollary--the shadow, as it were--of the central and Beijing governments' having insinuated the Olympics into everything (e.g., cross-straits relations, the re-branding of China as a mature and responsible international power, the promotion of architectural appreciation, municipal development, legislating to allow the quasi-public "taking" of "private property," the sequestration of "bad elements" from public view, promises of a "green Olympics," heightened intolerance of dissent, ad hoc experiments with air-quality control, the commercial development of sport, etc)?

again, i remind readers that the Olympics are an exercise in international relations and diplomacy, and are, as such, situated in an inherently political and tension-fraught context. (see, e.g., Xu Xin, Modernizing China in the Olympic Spotlight: China’s National Identity and the 2008 Beijing Olympiad, 54 Soc. Rev. 90, 91 (2006) (stating that "[i]t is almost a truism that contemporary sport is embedded in the global political economy, as well as in the development of the modern international state system.")

"politicization" is nothing new, nor is it a one-way street. by way of illustration: "At the time of the Moscow Olympics, Chinese leaders went out of their way to emphasize a link between politics and sports. On Feb. 1, 1980, for example, the Chinese Foreign Ministry issued a statement that it was 'obviously not suitable to stage the XXII Olympic Summer Games in Moscow under the circumstances of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.'" (NYT link here.)

China's early-1990s bid for the 2000 Olympics is also illustrative. a 1993 report from the NYT states that:

"[A] senior Chinese delegate even warned that if Beijing's bid for the 2000 games were rejected, China might boycott the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta in retaliation...."

at that time, in the years immediately following the 6.4 incident, a large number of "dissidents" were imprisoned or otherwise subject to extra-judicial detention in China. human and civil rights organizations throughout the world advocated for the release of these persons during Beijing's application as host city for the 2000 Games. the U.S. Congress likewise registered its concern over awarding the Games to Beijing in light of China's then-blemished record on civil rights. China's outcry was loud and indignant, but, nonetheless, scores of "prisoners" were released, thereby validating to no small degree the modes and methods employed by those opposed to China's bid.

to be sure, the deeply ideological nature and knee-jerk reactions of both the pro- and anti-Beijing Olympics activists are irritating. irksome though this discourse may be, however, it strikes me as disingenuous to suggest that the very real (though tiresome) political issues at play can be resolved by the simple dictate "if you don't like it, don't come."

by the way, i are the poster above, B (capitalized), are two separate persons.

"Wrong that it may be for the Western media to exaggerate the suppression in Tibet, in the end it's the Chinese who have the money, guns and numbers. The long-term injury done to the Tibetans has and will far outweigh the crimes Tibetans committed on March 14th, not to mention the criticism Westerners throw at China."

Good one. Justify racist attacks by playing relativist and trudging up past racist attacks....

Two wrongs never make a right. They only make bigger wounds. The poster's quote does not represent the feelings of most westerners, just racist thugs who hide behind a theology, petrol and machetes while murdering innocent people because of their race, and in the end they win no sympathy to their plight but comparisons to Mussolini-era fascist gangs and triad-inspired thuggery.

Many Chinese react like this, but it isnt suprising since nationalism, like their perceptions of tibet and taiwan, have been force fed to them by an overbearing government from birth. China is going to need legions of psychiatrists when they get some freedom one day.

马英九 won the Taiwan election. Not much of a surprise. Remember the Tibet 'riot' happened just one week ago. Is this a coincidence? How would these relate to each other? What was the plan? Who might be planning in behind? How did the CCP cope with the situation? Did the plan work?

-Quiz for International Politics 101

I support anyone who chooses to go or not go.

I just find reactions like this somewhat immature and what is alarming to me is aggressive feelings like this seem to form a substantial majority rather than a minority. Excessive emotions, passions and nationalism....history has shown that a walk down thisroute usually has a cliff at the end.

Overboard nationalistic sentiments are obviously not confined to China and such rising sentiments throughout the world should be something of concern to everyone.

Albert Einstien said it best.

“Nationalism is an infantile sickness. It is the measles of the human race.”

Can you take what you have been throwing at others, Jeff and B?

It is precisely because the west has been throwing this kind of bs at others (not just the Chinese) for too long. Imagine some foreign governments, foreign journalists are doing this to America. I don't think it will sit well with the American public. Note I am not talking about protesting the war in Iraq and burning of the American flags, I am talking about the non-stop condescending lecturing and "in-your face"-type provocative and interventionist approach. Imagine if the Russian government demands the US to explain the beating of Rodney King and the LA riot.

Nationalism is everywhere. What do you think the "Buy American" represents? What about the outrage over the USAF's new tanker deal? Last but not least, the "USA! USA! USA!" chant?

"除非身為外國人在大陸就無法體會這種普及偏見。"

What the hell does this mean? What "prejudice" are you talking about? "Nigger", "Chink" "Fly-ed lice" type of prejudice?

B: Nationalism in nation-building:

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/1987/11/a_damaged_culture_a_new_philip.php

The Olympics show should go on. I have come to appreciate its value as an intensive program of educating the Chinese population about the world they are stepping into, the players in the arena, their intentions and interests, and the most effective strategies for dealing with them.

The most valuable lesson from the Western media and activists has been debunking some myths intentionally created by Western elements, to mislead the naive Chinese, who have limited exposure to the outside world.

The biggest myth debunked for the Chinese is that as a nation they can just “come out” and “join” the “international community”. The reaction to the Chinese Olympics tells them that they must beat their way onto the world stage, smashing some pots and bottles if necessary. How do you do that? This needs to be learned from actually doing it. The Olympics will furnish some useful experiences.

The second myth debunked for the Chinese is that the Western media are generally objective, and as a result, that the western population is better informed on issues of importance. These Emperor’s new clothes are still held close to the chest by intellectual pigmies with earnest and insightful observations like this one:

“……like their perceptions of tibet and taiwan, have been force fed to them by an overbearing government from birth. China is going to need legions of psychiatrists when they get some freedom one day.”

You would definitely get Chinese attention with such astute intelligence and originality before they found out CNN et al were cropping photos, labeling police rescue as police arrests, and passing off Nepalese police as Chinese. Perseverance on this route to this day and being a dead-ender suggests a lack of insight warranting immediate medical attention.

No. The Western media is not objective and the Western population is not better informed than the Chinese. Does it surprise you that more than 50 percent of Americans still believe poor Saddam had something to do with 911 in NYC 2001? Should the Chinese stand to attention every time some poorly educated and ill-informed wachos in the West get on top of the roof with a banner against the Olympics or Chinese in Tibet?

A related myth that is getting debunked (but not quite so I am not going to dwell on it) is that Western governments are for the people and represent the people (since they are elected). No. Based on my limited observation in the US at least, the government represents the elite and governs on behalf of them at the expense of the poor and middle class. They are cleverer than the Chinese of course. Part of the cleverness of the American ruling class is to control the information accessible to the non-elite population (which is quite easy, due to the gap in cognitive development created by a skewed distribution of educational resources). They inform the common folks when they want them to be informed, and only on the issues of their choice. Cropping and mislabeling photos is just the crudest methodology. By examining the unenlightened world-views of the average American, you can clearly identify the ideologies indoctrinated from birth.

Another myth debunked was that the Chinese government has no popular support, the Chinese were waiting to be liberated from it. Actually this is not much of a myth these days, but mainly used as a feel-good nursing device by sucked out oranges that drifted East (mentally or physically) to numb themselves from the wounds they have suffered in their personal lives in the West. I personally have had the pleasure of their acquaintance. Bless their bleeding hearts.

Good points B.

Myself, I find the rudeness that characterises a lot of the discourse on this issue to be utterly unhelpful.
I'm a bit disappointed that Jeremy finds he can relate to someone who tells me I should fuck my mother.

And yes, to borrow from the language of the nationalists, they Olympics are, were and always will be a thoroughly political event.
They are held and promoted entirely for political motives.

>>But I am starting to agree with the sentiment expressed above:

"Fuck your mother! If you don't want to come, don't! If you don't want to participate, don't!"

Somehow I get the impression that if the Olympics were going to be held in Los Angeles this year and a bunch of Germans or Chinese used it as an opportunity to protest American actions in Iraq or elsewhere, you wouldn't be joining in sympathy with the American red-neck nationalists who would be telling these Chinese and German protesters to "fuck their mothers."

Really, you may think that these sort of protests are counterproductive (and I would agree to an extent), but your defence of jingo nationalism, which as you well know the CCP inflames as a means of distracting from the real issues, leaves something to be desired.

The double standard here is glaring.

I can understand the sentiment to boycott the Olympics but I think a better protest would be to attend the games and have athletes choose if they want to, to speak out about the Tibetan, Darfur, etc. situations or even do something like wear a small Tibetan flag on their uniform. What would China do, kick them out of the country? That would just further embarrass them.

I have heard other ideas such as boycotting the opening ceremony as well. I think these are all better ideas then not attending the games. The world community should have realized something like this was going to happen when it was agreed upon to give China the games in the first place. To late to back out now.

"What the hell does this mean? What "prejudice" are you talking about? "Nigger", "Chink" "Fly-ed lice" type of prejudice?"

I'll explain it for you. The poster "parker" claimed the mainland Chinese were free of prejudice, "because there is no insult here which we chinese often meet in foreign countries."

Of course, you and many others have proved him wrong.

Glaring double standards indeed.
Yes two wrongs do not make a right. But there is a difference between being relativistic and keeping things in perspective. The fact is that this thuggery didn't happen because Tibetans are just naturally thuggish. Sure they're to blame, but ultimately this would not have happened were it not for bad CCP policies. And before you start accusing me of double standards, I would say the same thing in regards to race riots in the US, Palestinians, the Iraqi insurgency and so on. Those people, however, have a far better chance at success than Tibetans, and (it seems to me) there are more people in America who are aware of and oppose those injustices. Speaking of which, I wonder if some of the people who insist on focusing on the riots as if they happened in isolation would be so philosophical about the insurgencies in Iraq or Afghanistan. As an American I get a lot of crap for American foreign policy, especially in China, and much of the world's media isn't exactly soft on the US either- so I find it hard to be sympathetic with Chinese people whose response to criticism is "fuck you." Where I come from, we'd call Americans who say that "Bushies," and I'm guessing not many people here would take that as a compliment.
Anyway, try looking at things from a Tibetan's perspective- not only do you face no job opportunities and discrimination from those in power or with money, but people who do not share your cultural background or language are flooding into your homeland, perhaps creating the same demographic situation as Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia. Your peaceful protests are suppressed, the government blatantly tries to control your religion and all your major religious leaders are in exile. What's going to happen in your mind? This isn't to say that what they did was RIGHT, just to say that what they did was the result of a greater wrong, which the Western media seems to be more aware of than a lot of Chinese. The killing of Hans and Huis on March 14th is over, but the oppression of Tibetans is still going on- or do you seriously believe that even after this Hans and Huis are going to be less well protected by the CCP than Tibetans? The weaker side is always more tragic, because they suffer more- a point people rightly seem to keep in mind more often when it comes to the west.
Again, this is not to say the Western media covered it well- but harping on 3/14 seems not unlike harping on 9/11 while Iraq gets bombed.
And a final point, which I forgot to make to ESNW- the term "ethnic cleansing" suggests an organized attempt to cleanse Tibet of non-Tibetans, rather than random hatred aimed at passing Hans and Huis. By choosing this term do you suggest that those rioting Tibetans are comparable to the Hutus in 1994, or to what happened in Bosnia in the mid-'90's? My point in my prev. comment is that it's a bit absurd to say a small, unarmed group is committing ethnic cleansing against a another group backed by guns and far more people- I was not trying to justify a wrong by pointing to another wrong.

@Pfeffer:

"Imagine some foreign governments, foreign journalists are doing this to America"

They do ALL THE TIME, and frankly, I am grateful for it. It opens minds, it creates discouse, it creates debate and introduces ideas and arguments from outside the box which I'm are most often overlooked inside the box.

@Inst:

Thank you for the link. I'm a fan of James Fallows but haven't had an opportunity to read an archival piece of his. There is something to be said about the binding effect of nationalism. However, I'm partial to the idea that such an effect can be achieved through a more...how to say...patriotic approach? The difference between patriotism and nationalism is at times very obscure and raises many new questions. But I've always viewed patriotism as a expression of pride in a countries achievements. We are proud to live here, we are proud to have this way of life. An expression of confidence.

Nationlism to me creates a situation of "my country right or wrong, my country oh so strong..." A reaction to a possible a lack of confidence.

I certainly glues together a society, but I don't believe it is sustainable ideology nor does it provide a nation with a very good "image"...and I still feel that it is something that will take you over the edge.

"I relate to his feelings about the Olympics and how it is getting dragged into everything from the air quality to Tibet to Sudan. Of course, many people expected exactly this.

But I am starting to agree with the sentiment expressed above:

"Fuck your mother! If you don't want to come, don't! If you don't want to participate, don't!" "---JEREMY

I feel regret to say this but I am suprised by your opinion and frankly I am sad to have to respond to it.
That's an especially scary way to go through life turning a blind eye to stuff you know in good conscience is wrong. That's something Google, Yahoo, and all other businesses in this most populated country must do---lose their integrity in order to do business there.
To say that because you disagree with some host country's policy you should just stay home is nonsense. What does that solve? Nothing.
They should all go there and say what they want to say...but they should also know when they do so there are consequences. That being said they should still go damnit.
It's Easter --- although it seems this website is anti-Catholic and therefore anti-conscience --- so we as individuals at the very least have a responsibility to voice opposition and concern when corrupt individuals, businesses, or entire nations walk around like their sh*t don't stink. The country in question hosting the games this year has smelly sh*t eminating around the globe. Stop denying it by throwing around explatives, blaming the West for unfairly picking on this nation, and telling foreigners to stay out. Let's all have a pity party instead and honor that country for the many hardships they've inflicted on themselves and others because the Western media does its' job and reports the truth about the situation because it is unfair...Boo Hoo Hoo. Shame on you Western media they have a 5000 year glorious history of only good and happy things. That sentiment the blogger expresses and you concur with are pure cop outs and you know it.

Very well said bianxiangbianqiao.

Blaming the people raising objection instead of the people who shuts the door and beat the people is so, erh, Chinese... I won't call it nationalism. This is too demeaning to the term.

Hey, Jeremy,

Please come to your senses. The central government gets a lot of unwarranted abuse- envy of economic success and cultural bias DO influence what people say about the place. And you're generally good about pointing that out.

On the other hand, you're living in a nation with an abominable record of abusing their own citizens and oppressing conquered peoples. The notion that everyone will shut up and play nice while the government pretends that everything is harmonious inside its borders is nonsense. No one with any kind of historical perspective could expect that to happen, and no one with any kind of sympathy for the oppressed would want it to.

Now, you can definitely say that some parties are counter-productive in their criticism. I thought that the issue of Darfur was handled badly by activists; it doesn't always work to shout. Protests have to be measured, and staying away from the games might mean that your voice is simply ignored. But it's clear that the Olympics are very important to the authorities, and that's the precisely the reason you would want to set terms on your harmonious attendance. Not asking for human rights concessions as a condition for cooperating in the games is a moral lapse in and of itself. Being strident, irrational, or asking for the impossible isn't the right way to go, either, but you can't change someone's behavior if you do nothing.

Seriously, Goldkorn, you've been in the country too long. You're starting to identify with the worst aspects of Chinese nationalism. Cry me a river. China isn't a "developing" country anymore. It's a developed nation with severe governance problems, and it should be treated like it. The world is rough and tough, and China has never shied away from playing hardball in its foreign relations. There is no reason on earth that the central government, and the Chinese people, can't absorb a little criticism. Their nuts, like the nuts of every powerful nation, stand exposed for all to fondle and squeeze.

"Somehow I get the impression that if the Olympics were going to be held in Los Angeles this year and a bunch of Germans or Chinese used it as an opportunity to protest American actions in Iraq or elsewhere, you wouldn't be joining in sympathy with the American red-neck nationalists who would be telling these Chinese and German protesters to "fuck their mothers."

Two things: (1) Protesting the war in Iraq and protesting what happened in Tibet are two very different things. The US invaded a sovereign nation based on a false assumption/excuse when the real intention points to nothing but naked interests. The Chinese government cracked down on rioters who violently attacked civilians and properties in their own country. These two are completely different things. A better example would be Chinese and Germans etc. threatening to boycott the Olympics held in a US city because of the Rodney King incident, Waco, Texas.

(2) There are already many "American red-neck nationalists" telling foreigners to screw themselves because they are opposing the foreign policy of the Bush administration. military.com for example is one of many places to find these "American red-neck nationalists".

"Of course, you and many others have proved him wrong."

Foreigner, seriously, what "prejudice" have you experienced? That if you are a foreigner, you are rich?

J B, you sound like you know a lot about the plight of the Tibetans. Tell us what you have experienced please. What suppression and discrimination are you referring to?

B, good for you, go tell those people on military.com that don't always ask the foreigners to **** off.

Wiss and everybody, if you guys are so outraged by what you think happened in Tibet and Darfur, are you guys more outraged by what has happened in Iraq? Please kindly point to one or two of your pieces covering that topic. I want to be enlightened.

The old Olympic story tells me in old Greek when the game would be held, only in this day every city droped their weapon and unarmed to enjoy the mutual festival.
Tired of arguing back and forth. One more time, Olympic is simply A SPORT FEAST! My chinese fellows and I just want to enjoy it for the whole year, cuz we waited it too long.And today the Olympic flame will be lighted on.

Pffefer:

Nobody denied that there are red-neck ultra-nationalists in America. I think some people expressed surprise that Jeremy, whom we usually know as a moderate, balanced correspondent, said he agreed with sentiment that could be described as red-neck Chinese ultra-nationalism.

There have been protests at other Olympics before. As I've said before on other sites, there were protests by Aboriginal Australians at the Sydney Olympics. I'm not sure if red-neck ozzies told non-Australians who were interested in those protests to "Fuck your mother". If so, it would be just as pointless and wrong-headed as the ultra-nationalist Chinese response to mainstream Western interest in Tibet.

Foreigner, B, J B, Wiss etc., babelfish this:

● 邱震海（香港）

　　西藏最近发生二十年来最大规模的骚乱，引起国际高度关注。虽然这几天中国官方陆续公布了一些事实真相，但由于仍未开放外国记者前往当地采访，因此各种消息满天飞；欧洲国家有网民认为，在这个时候，中国政府无论说什么都不会有人相信。这话听上去刺耳，但却反映了西方世界在西藏问题上的某些固有思维和情结。中国若能仔细研究，进而从克服自身政治文化的局限出发，改善国际公关技巧，相比在距离北京奥运尚有四个半月之际，面对未来仍可能随时发生的各种危机，当有一定益处。

　　西藏问题错综复杂，其间在汉藏情结、文明尊重与对话等方面有许多需要深入探讨的领域，这些问题的长期延误，加上政治利益的犬牙交错，导致西藏事务日趋复杂。但就此次风波而言，显然是骚乱在前，官方依法处理在后，而且骚乱的打砸抢程度到了令人发指的地步。此类事件发生在任何一个西方国家，无论其深层背景如何，政府均会依照程序进行处理，九二年洛杉矶和2005年巴黎骚乱无不如此。

　　唯独到了西藏问题，西方媒体和知识界就换了一种思维。无论在过去就西藏问题而产生的争执，还是在此次风波中，西方知识界几乎一面倒谴责中国政府，此次更是指责动用警力，并要求中国克制，而不顾骚乱在前的基本事实。西方知识界的批判主义和实证主义精神，在西藏问题上完全让位于概念化认知，这显然与某些深层情结有关。因此，研判西方的立场，出台国际公关措施，第一步当研究西方知识界的这一深层情结。

西方的多种情结和盲点

　　在西藏问题上，西方知识界具有互相交织的多重情结，导致的结果就是知识界和公众在形成看似正义、实质混乱和无法理清乃至自拔的怪圈。

　　情结之一：西方知识界长期具有批判主义、自由主义和理想主义传统，注重公民自由、人权和自决，以不信任政府为基本特征，这是文艺复兴和资产阶级革命后，西方社会一笔弥足珍贵的精神财富。问题是：当这笔精神财富遇到西藏问题，就会由于后文将要阐述的另几类因素，而变得扭曲或至少变形。

　　情结之二：过去数百年东西方秩序倾斜过程，导致西方因其现代化的成功而成为世界的楷模，而人权、民主、自由和公民自决等被历史证明为行之有效的价值观，自然便成为所谓的主流价值观，因此在西方与中国交往的过程中，始终有一种底气十足的居高临下，再加上就一般意义而言，中国确实无法也不应该拒绝由西方缘起，而今已成为普世价值观一部分的自由、民主和人权，中西对话的天平由此就更为倾斜。

　　情结之三：由于西方现代化的迅速发展，以及东西方秩序的极度倾斜，西方社会（尤其是欧洲主要国家）蔓延着一种对人类原始文明的猎奇般的热衷和近乎宗教般的狂热，其代表首先是非洲和西藏。这种文化现象本身无可非议，问题是不可避免地会遇到某些“非文化因素”，于是就会变得复杂起来。比如在西藏问题上，西方知识界对西藏原始文化或猎奇或虔诚的热衷，就导致其必然对任何介入西藏问题的其他因素采取不客观的态度。

　　情结之四：西方在意识形态上与中国仍存在巨大的差异，尤其是冷战结束后西方主流价值观更是在与包括中国在内的全球大多数国家交往中处于既合理又居高临下的地位，因此同样是美国或法国警方可以依法处理其国内的骚乱（不管骚乱背后的深层原因是多么复杂），但到了中国身上，便立刻成为谴责的对象。

上述四种情结的交织，就导致西方知识界的内在分裂和困惑。这种分裂和困惑归纳起来就是：一、批判主义、自由主义与简单化思维的结合；二、实证主义传统与忽略事实和逻辑之间的悖论。
　　西方尤其是欧洲知识界在西藏问题上的这些情结和困惑，在相当程度影响了西方的公众舆论和思维。但就整体而言，正是在这些认知交错和误解中，蕴藏着中国展开有效国际公关的巨大空间。

须把握的几个关键

　　就西藏问题的国际公关而言，笔者之前曾提出迅速、坦诚、透明的原则。之所以说中国不能忽视在西藏问题上国际公关，原因不但在于这一问题的长期性、复杂性，同时更在于从现在起到八月北京奥运，这一问题若处理不好，还可能引起更强烈的国际冲击波。

　　同时必须看到，中国对西藏的主权，长期来受到国际社会的认可，这为中国与西方在西藏问题上的互动，搬掉了一个结构性的障碍。而且也应看到，即便在西藏风波发生后，绝大多数的西方国家政府都还是希望北京对此保持克制态度，并尽力维持与北京官方的沟通渠道；尤其在是否抵制北京奥运的问题上，至今没有国家和国际组织的官方表示将采取抵制行动。只要绝大多数西方国家的政府不介入，抵制奥运行动就掀不起大风波。因此，在这次的西藏问题上，北京只要迅速平息事端，如实公布真相，就可以做到降低北京奥运受到的冲击。

　　在这方面，显然存在着长期公关和短期公关两个问题。就长期公关而言，涉及到中国与西方长期沟通的问题，当然也涉及到中国在这过程中逐步完善或调整其对西藏政策的问题；就短期公关而言，则涉及到在近期如何让国际社会更多了解事实真相的问题，其中尤其是开放外国记者进入西藏实地采访。

　　无论是长期还是短期公关，都涉及到几个关键：一、以坦诚心态面对国际社会，哪怕是面对充满误解的人士；二、从国际社会的多重情结及其盲点（见上文阐述）入手，用国际社会通用的语言和方式，展开有说服力的工作；三、从西方一些大牌专栏作家和知识界人士着手开展工作，进行沟通，同时也可有精通西方的的人士在西方报刊上撰写文章。

"Foreigner", B, J B etc. another piece for you to babelfish:

多维专稿：知识分子不能象美国政府一样

DWNEWS.COM-- 2008年3月23日23:5:9(京港台时间) --多维新闻网

冼岩／对西藏事务有深入研究的王力雄先生最近撰文《西藏事件的责任该由谁负》，将此次西藏事件定性为“民变”。他一方面指出“民变往往都会形成暴力，鱼龙混杂，行为残酷，没有理性”，另一方面又认为民众暴力行为的“责任却不能归于民众，而是应该由激起民变的统治者承担”。

且先不说王先生这个说法的是非对错，只是按此逻辑作个类推：9.11的责任“不能归于”基地组织和本.拉登，而只能归于激起了恐怖袭击的美国政府。正是美国政府的中东政策，引起了阿拉伯民众的愤怒，导致爆发。这种愤怒的民众引爆人肉炸弹，实施恐怖袭击，“一点也不奇怪”，“历史上如此，当代各国也一样”。其他恐怖行动，也当作如是观。

不仅如此，按照王先生的逻辑，美国和其他国家的政府还不能以武力对付恐怖分子，否则就是有“罪”，因为：“用什么方法控制事态，那是当权者的责任，不是无权者的责任。当权者不能控制事态，那是他的失职，是有罪。而当权者靠杀人才能控制事态，那不是他的功，仍然是他的罪。决不能因为他最终控制了事态，杀人就变成合理。因为事态之所以出现、发展和失控，就是因为统治者所造成的。况且，使用杀人的方式，只能震慑一时，却无法从根本上解决冲突，反而会积累下更多的仇恨，把社会推进下一次更大冲突的循环”。

不知道王先生对9.11，对各种恐怖活动执何种态度。如果他认为恐怖活动“一点也不奇怪”，“责任不能归于恐怖分子”，那么我佩服他的理性勇气；如果他也认为恐怖分子“灭绝人性”，主张武力打击，那么我不得不说，他其实已经没有了说“西藏事件的责任该由谁负”这番话的立场。

考验知识分子理性与勇气的最好试金石，是看他们对待不同对象是否能采取同一标准。无论如何，知识分子总不能象美国政府一样：一方面自己四处动武，动不动就“先发制人”；另一方面却厚颜无耻地“教导”中国：“暴力无助于解决任何人的问题”。

Dear Pfeffer;

Most Chinese do not really believe foreigners are rich but that 1) making money is easy for us in our own countries (because most foreigners are not hard-working like Chinese and spend their time drinking and staying out late at KTV like bad, bad Chinese who have money) and 2) foreigners are stupid about money, simple really, not complicated but child-like (look at the depiction of Westerners in your television serials).

But you ask for examples of prejudice. Rather than give you a library of complaint - and any of the foreigners here can recite ad nauseum their daily experiences - why not simply understand prejudice? It is a preconceived notion, especially an unfavourable opinion, formed without sufficient reason or knowledge.

Chinese are very fond of generalizations and particularly eager to assume the worst in others, especially comparing and judging foreigners by supposedly unique Chinese cultural standards. The result is common, human qualities like respect for one's father and mother, the love of parents for the child (in fact the respect and tolerance parents have for all children), family bonds, the sacrifices made for family and friends, sympathy for others, are seen as uniquely Chinese virtues, part of 5,000 years (now boosted up to 8,000 years) of Chinese culture. This is the greatest prejudice, that Chinese in general deny the humanity of others.

Sure, most foreigners in China, especially those who speak Chinese (to this day mainland Chinese find it hard to believe that, yes, there are foreigners who read and write Chinese and no, they didn't learn it by spending a long time in Beijing or Shanghai) will have close, close Chinese friends, but those few Chinese are always the exception. Even those close Chinese friends find it hard to think beyond their relationship with that single foreigner and extend the same attitude and empathy to other foreigners.

And the result is saddening. Not a few weeks at school in the US and the reality of being abroad without the safety network of familiarity truly shakens many mainland Chinese. After two weeks one mainland Chinese in despair told the counselor, "but how can I trust you? You're a foreigner!" Such a pained soul will have a hard time overcoming prejudice. Even when confronted with the bare truth Chinese have a hard time accepting a reality that would change their pre-conceptions. Instead, they make simple and most often low assumptions about persons who are not Chinese, especially about Westerners and particularly Americans (the bogey man), because it reassures them, confirming the "rightness" of their opinions. To foreigners the result is often ridiculous: Chinese always saying, 中國人比較謙虛 when clearly mainland Chinese are not modest; Chinese answering most arguments with two excuses, 中國人太多﹐ and 你不懂﹐不了解中國.

Three things:

1)>> Protesting the war in Iraq and protesting what happened in Tibet are two very different things.

Who said they were "the same?" That isn't the point. The point is using the Olympics as a venue/opportunity to protest something a government is doing.

2) >>A better example would be Chinese and Germans etc. threatening to boycott the Olympics held in a US city because of the Rodney King incident, Waco, Texas.

Ok. And? Who cares if Germans or Chinese threaten to boycott the Olympics because of Waco or Rodney King or because they don't like Bush's haircut? If you weren't so paranoid and insecure regarding everything foreigners say about China, you wouldn't give a shit, either. All you are doing is displaying China's complete lack of confidence vis-a-vis the outside world. We will know China is really a world power when most Chinese simply don't care what foreigners say anymore. That point is obviously still far off, unfortunately.

3) >>There are already many "American red-neck nationalists" telling foreigners to screw themselves

Yes, there are. I wonder if Jeremy sympathizes with them. After all, they are sick of hearing foreigners telling the US what to do and criticizing it without understanding it. The foreign media is biased and once used a picture of a Canadian who they claimed was American (!) -- a death blow to free media everywhere. I, on the other hand, don't sympathize with red-neck nationalists from any country -- especially from America and China.

@pffefer.

Military sites are easily the best place to go if you are fishing for the best of western nationalism. Go to strategypage.com for some real crack-pots. I make it a policy of reading the articles and some threads but posting anything their forums like those is completely out of the questions...such domains are no place for a moderate like myself. Getting into a fight there will ruin your week.

However they are more of a reflection of attitudes within the military (which I would argue is the banner-holding entity of nationalism in any particular country).

Pffefer,
First off, I owe you an apology for not reading your long Chinese posts- I'm still somewhat slow at reading Chinese, and frankly even if it were English, I just don't have the time.
First off, what we are criticizing is not the Tibet situation per se, but the Chinese reaction to criticism. We are not saying right now that you or any other Chinese person should do anything to oppose CCP policy or even that you should change your mind- we're saying that you should not be insulted by criticism. I think I speak for several posters here when I say we all feel that criticism of any action by any country, including our own, is right and constructive. We all admit that people who refuse to accept criticism exist in al our countries. We can only speak for ourselves, not for our governments or for every ignorant, racist ultranationalist in countries- and the same goes for you. We are disagreeing with Hecaitou's rejection of criticism of China, and Jeremy's and ESNW's (and apparently your) endorsements of what Hecaitou says. That's all this is about.
You may feel that China hasn't done anything as bad as the US, but that's beside the point. This isn't about who's more evil, or who's evil and who's good. This is about Tibet, China's extreme sensitivity to criticism and that's all. People have prejudices and make unfair judgments about every country, and the more powerful you are the more you'll hear- this isn't just people picking on China.

"The foreign media is biased"

Being a redneck is NOT a bad thing. I love me some motor sports, I have fried an egg on a V-8 engine, I have gone hunting for deer in the mountains of Pennsylvania, I have cheered the Steelers with my shirt off holding a bucket of fried potatoes cooked in animal lard, and I am a redneck damnit!
I am a citizen of the USA and I am very proud of this as well as my brave father who fought honorably in the Vietnam War.
However, as my old man said, "son, Americans are just lucky to have been born under this flag and not some other rag waving about. It's important to love and be proud of your country but don't ridicule others for having the bad luck to have been born somewhere else."

Of course the foreign media is biased and the nation that gets criticized the MOST is the USA. On top of that even the US media criticizes the USA more than any other place in the world. Keep it straight...China doesn't get but a fraction of the feces hurled at it that American pseudo-intellectuals throw at America.

The one point that seems so obvious but no one ever mentions is that these Games are in the Capital of nation. As such the big business of any capital is what line of work? If the the Games were held in my hometown (Lancaster, PA) the controversy might be over Shoe Fly Pie and maybe the diabetics from the world over would protest. We fine humble folk welcome the criticism of our baked goods and as a result might offer along side our traditional recipe a version of Shoe Fly Pie with an artificial sweetener.

As for Tibet...
I don't think this has anything to do with the above arguments- like I just said, this is about accepting criticism, and the fact that though you may think your country is unfairly criticized, a lot of other people feel the same way about their countries being criticized. There is no objective way to determine whose criticism is the least fair.

I've been there twice (three times according to Tibetan's definition) and talked to a lot of Tibetans and other people living there, in Chinese. Suffice to say that there was a lot of racism, many Tibetans wanted independence and even more revered the Dalai Lama. I did not ask people their opinions; they offered them. I talked to Tibetan shopkeepers, monks, drivers, waiters and peasants in Amdo, Kham, U and Tsang. Of course this can only give me part of the picture, but I'm pretty sure that most Tibetans are not happy with Chinese rule, and that many Chinese people discriminate against Tibetans.
As for the usual Chinese arguments about Tibet, I've heard 'em all. Unless you're an expert on Tibet trained somewhere outside China, you probably won't be able to change my opinions. I may be wrong, but I think I've come to the best conclusion I can based on what I know and have seen.

To JB:

It's not about "criticism." If the west criticizes fairly and reasonably, the Chinese are very good listeners--average Chinese know a lot more about the west than westerns about China. Before people throw out big words like "ethnic cleansing" or "cultural genocide," they should look up for the definitions of these terms. Before they pray for cultural purity and the benign and wise dalai lama, they should read a few books about how Tibet was under the lama ruling (esp. the parts about sacrificing humans for devils and the killing of serfs). Also look up some statistics, so that you know the ratio of minorities in China has risen from 5% to 9% since 1949 and Tibetan percentage in Tibet has risen since 1980s up to 92% today (in US university library database)....

Grossly neglecting a large part of the picture and desperately trying to justify bias and lies, that is pathetic.

Of course China has plenty problems, very big ones too. But trashing it is not going to help it fix them. Business and cultural exchange will go on no matter who is ruling Tibet. History will not go backward. It is those westerners who suffer from Tibet-fetish who should go to see some shrinks.

"Foreigner",

It is funny that you are accusing the Chinese of indulging themselves in stereotypes and generalizations while you are making some whopping generalizations about the Chinese ("when clearly mainland Chinese are not modest; Chinese answering most arguments with two excuses"). Don't you find it ironic?

Let's start with the two perceptions that you think "most Chinese" have toward foreigners. (1)"making money is easy for us in our own countries". Please explain you mean, I am a little puzzled. It is harder to make money in China? And are you saying most Chinese think foreigners are not hard-working and wasting their money drinking and clubing? Wow. How many Chinese have actually come to interact with foreigners so much that they have luxuary to critique their lifestyles? (2) "foreigners are stupid about money, simple really, not complicated but child-like (look at the depiction of Westerners in your television serials)". Again please explain and elaborate. What TV serials are you referring to?

So I take "the prejudice" is all related to money huh? The complaint about Chinese boasting their family values does not register with me. I have yet to meet a single Chinese who tells me that "only we Chinese care about family, you foreigners don't". And I have no idea what you were trying to say regarding your perception that the Chinese find it hard to believe that some foreigners could read and write Chinese. What's so "hard to believe" about it? In Beijing alone there are tons of foreigners who speak Chinese fluently. The Chinese used to be amused by Chinese-speaking foreigners, but nowadays they hardly raise their eyebrows.

Are the quality of deep-rooted perceptions and perhaps prejudice? Yes, absolutely. But certainly most of them are rather harmless compared to the typical prejudice and sometimes outright bigotry that someone could experience in the west. It might be true that some Chinese have difficulties confiding to foreigners, but to say that "they make simple and most often low assumptions about persons who are not Chinese" is ridiculous. On the contrary, I believe the problem with many Chinese is that they have what people called "inferiority complex", that they give too much importance to what the foreigners say about them and some of them have too high of an opinion of certain foreigners (read white people). In a way China is a racist country in a very strange and self-hating way (that foreigners, especially the whites are deemed superior). Check this out: http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/china/2008/03/no-dogs-and-chi.html#comments

Finally "Foreigner", how many Chinese have you met to enable you pile up your own generalizations and stereotypes, just wondering?

Jim,

I largely with what you said, that the Chinese shouldn't give a damn about what people say about them and this displays their lack of confidence. But this is not the entire issue. I think many people would not have been so outraged had the criticism been fair or factual. The problem is much of this criticism is based on biased perceptions of the whole Tibet issue, including what actually happened in Lhasa. Before the facts were out, western media, commentators etc. were hastily condemning the Chinese government for a "brutal crackdown". Once again the Chinese government was painted as the bad guy while the Tibetan "protesters" (rioters actually) were the good guys who got screwed and victimized. I don't think it will bode well with the American public if people criticize the US with dubious information. Certainly most Americans would probably not react as passionately as the Chinese did, precisely because they have the confidence (We are the best! America is No.1! Screw you!) the Chinese do not have.

Also there is the hypocrisy factor. For example NYT ran an editorial accusing the Chinese of terrorizing Tibet. Many people in the west are pointing fingers at China because of Darfur. A lot of Chinese felt the west, especially the US is no position to lecture or criticize the Chinese on human rights, Tibet or Darfur. They are saying: Which country recently invaded two sovereign nations, directly and indirectly causing the death of hundreds and thousands of civilians in these countries? How come all we hear about is the casualty of the US military (4000 and counting), how come nobody seems to care about the poor Iraqis who are being slaughtered?

pffefer

Comments on the Chinese articles you posted:

With a few reservations, I think they are quite good. This does not mean that I agree with everything they both say, but neither of them argue that 1) any Western criticism of China is inevitably wrong, or 2) that if you have reservations about the Olympics you should 'fuck your mother'
Furthermore, the first article makes some very good recommendations, namely that: the Government should "put out a hand to and begin working with big-name Western columnists and intellectuals and initiate communication"

To some extent I think both writers have misunderstood the dominant viewpoint within the Western mainstream media. Sure, rioters who've committed murder would be arrested in America or France. But why kick the media out? How does anyone know that people aren't being arrested (and tortured) for having participated in the initial peaceful protest?
We could argue these points if you want, but my main concern in posting on this thread initially wasn't issues like this -it was the notion that if Westerners don't want to go to the Olympics for political reasons they should fuck their mothers. A point of view expressed by neither article you posted.

何必經過Babelfish﹖你以為機器翻譯代替我中文學問﹖什麼東西! 我從頭到尾都沒有提到西藏的事﹔你怎麼看不懂﹖

Pffefer, as far as I can remember, isn't Chinese- he's just a foreigner who loves to play the "I have a huge China-Penis because I know Chinese" game and will write off or downplay the worst behavior of Chinese people.

And comparing redneck nationalism by referring to US military sites is hardly fair, since you can see the same psychotic, foaming-at-the-mouth ranting in 75%+ of the posts on any topic that can conceivably be read as "China vs. foreigners" on any major Chinese forum- with a much higher percentage, of course, if there's actually a significant controversy.

"Foreigner",

我又不知道你懂不懂中文，所以我让你babelfish那篇文章（如果你不懂的话），我并没有什么恶意。你没提西藏，我也没和你提呀，你瞎激动什么？就事论事会不会？

Mac, do I know you? I didn't think so.

Downplaying the worst behavior the Chinese people? Are you referring to what happened in Tibet or "Fuck your mother! If you don't want to come, don't! If you don't want to participate, don't!"? If you meant the latter, then I don't get it: It is an opinion expressed by one individual, what's wrong with one expressing his view? I thought you people have been championing freedom of speech, huh?

And please Mac, by no means is "red-neck nationalism" confined to miltary sites. I was on AOL in the late 90's and it was no different from those Chinese forums you mentioned. Of course, Americans in general don't give a rat's ass about what foreigners say anyway.

Pfeffer, surely you cannot be so dumb to your surroundings, so dead to common experiences, so deaf to what is said to, about and around you, but that you fail to understand half of what I wrote suggests willful ignorance. That you would demand my bona fides suggests you are spending way too much time closeted with shallow, like-minded people.

I'll help you out and translate my Chinese comments to you:

Why use Babelfish? You think machine translation can substitute for my knowledge of Chinese? What kind of thing are you? From first to last I made no mention of Tibet; how can you not understand?

I can also translate my other Chinese posts here for your benefit.

Lived in Manhattan for 7 years. Never met a Manhattan Indian.

Lived in Michigan for 4 years. Never met a Michigan Indian.

Lived in Onadaga County in Upstate New York. Never met an Onadaga Indian.

US Presidential elections kick off in Iowa. Show me one Ioway Indian who participated.

Tibet gets kicked around every now and then (there appears to be plentiy of them around). Lamentable. But genocide is a crime only Westerners commit.

The economy of China is progressing at such rate that a certain fear is struck in the Western mind. Not exactly the fear of being overtaken, but the fear of being revealed. For all the abuses in Tibet, China never committed genocide nor has it enslaved people to achieve economic growth. The West relieved its Malthusian pressures through migrations of its excess population - an option that the Chinas and Indias of the world do not have.

"Foreigner",

I thought you would like this.

奉旨朕欽奉隆裕皇太后懿旨：
前因民軍起事，各省相應，九夏沸騰，生靈塗炭。特命袁世凱遣員與民軍代表討論大局，議開國會、公決政體。兩月以來，尚無確當辦法。南北暌隔，彼此相持。商輟于塗，士露於野。國體一日不決，民生一日不安。今全國人民心理，多傾向共和。南中各省，既倡義於前，北方將領，亦主張於後。人心所向，天命可知。予亦何忍因一姓之尊榮，拂兆民之好惡。是用外觀大勢，內審輿情，特率皇帝將統治權公諸全國，定為立憲共和國體。近慰海內厭亂望治之心，遠協古聖天下為公之義。袁世凱前經資政院選為總理大臣，當茲新舊代謝之際，宜為南北統一之方。即由袁世凱以全權組織臨時共和政府，與民軍協商統一辦法。總期人民安堵，海宇乂安，仍合滿、蒙、漢、回、藏五族完全領土為一大中華民國。予與皇帝得以退處安閒，優遊歲月，受國民之優禮，親見郅治之告成，豈不懿歟！欽此。

Foreigner,

学了一点中文，就开始摆样子。但是，你想不到有人完全了解像你这样伪善者西方人别扭的心态，自夸自的习惯。要是西方没把美国，加拿大，澳大利亚，土生人屠杀， 你不会有今天批评中国的机会。

Babelfish that!

Now go felch your mother

Aidsmonkey,很典型﹐罵不絕口﹐但是毫無內容﹐以口頭濫調替代思考﹐好可憐。

Pfeffer, yes, your parrot talents and pandering should find local employment.

Foreigner,

I abuse you because it's too easy. I also presented you with a well argued charge of hypocrisy which you refuse to address. Because you can't. You know I see right through your empty bluster.

很典型

Pfeffer, okay, I'll relent. The edict of abdication of the Xuantong Emperor is not really a great model of classical Chinese or prose but... I don't understand your purpose in posting it. Frankly, I appreciate the colloquial style and content of 朱光潛. I can't understand why that appreciation would incur more abuse from a few of the Chinese here but it will, it will.

Aidsmonkey, I've never once mentioned Tibet, I've said nothing about the Chinese government, and you accuse me of hypocrisy? And this

"You study a little Chinese and begin to show off. But you never thought some would fully understand your kind of hypocritical, Western bumbling attitude, (your) habit of self-praise. If the West did not slaughter the indigenous peoples of America, Canada and Australia you wouldn't have a chance today to criticize China."

is a "well-argued charge of hypocrisy"? Aidsmonkey, obviously you use words even in Chinese that you can't understand or control, and you think you're bright?

Pfeffer, I hope you're learning from this example of cultural exchange and sensibility, or at least help your friend Aidsmonkey put together a coherent thought.

Did I mention Tibet in my response to you?

Address the accusation.

"learn from this example of cultural exchange and sensibility"

Are we exchanging cultures? What are you assuming?

I'm American. Maybe I've exchanging New York City culture for whatever culture you're from?

"Foreigner",

I don't know what your problem is. You can insult me all you want, but your observations and conclusions simply do not sway me or register with me. Sounds like you are pretty prejudiced yourself, man. This might sound a little cheesy, but if they drive you crazy, why don't you just leave?

I don't know Aidsmonkey, you don't know me, so you cut the crap about "your friend..." stuff, will you? I am for myself and I speak for myself only.

The point about posting the edict of abdication of the Xuantong Emperor is to show you and those of you who understand Chinese this: "總期人民安堵，海宇乂安，仍合滿、蒙、漢、回、藏五族完全領土為一大中華民國。" Go figure.

Anyone want to lay odds on Foreigner, Aidsmonkey, and Pffefer all being young, single men without girlfriends or wives?

Joe,

Thanks, sometimes I wish I was single, hehe. Just don't tell my wife that! :-)

pffefer

I only know you through what you reveal on here, but based on that alone, I am sure you wife also sometimes wishes you were single

I'm a leggy blonde.

One world, one dream folks.