Chinese Netizens versus Western Media is not bad. It is not an every day affair that you see a western media on the defensive. On the other hand, the author is still trying to imply, however subtly, somehow all these bloggers are linked to the Chinese government -- maybe that is just my impression after reading the article.


"A Little Understanding, Please"

"A Little Understanding, Please" is kind of an interesting article. It is amusing to see those media dudes wonder why all of a sudden "the Chinese" hate them so much.

Indeed, a little understanding, please!

People in the west (that includes me) have much shorter attention span which seems to lead to shorter memory span. Nobody seems to deny that the CIA was involved in Tibet back in the 1940's and 1950's, but everybody seems to choose to forget or ignore that bit of history. When the US (although it is the government not the people) did and continue to do bad things all over the world, these American journalists wonder why their words are not being trusted? They are not really that, well, simple minded. Are they?


Now these are some believable accounts.


Will you vote for John McCain?

As much as I respect John McCain -- I trust him to be an honest person, I will not vote for him. Republicans may all be respectable individually. Yet the party is simply not. I have no respect nor trust in them whatsoever. I am not a Democrat, not even an independent. I am just me.

I am curious where those 19% of Obama supporters, or the 28% of Clinton supporters, who would vote for McCain live.

I guess I may donate to Hillary Clinton's campaign, just for the sake of supporting her staying in the race. It is supposed to be a competition. Is it not?

"Western Media Bias or outright fabrication on Tibet Riots"

Lies don't help anybody: Western Media Bias or outright fabrication on Tibet Riots

Pictures linked in the original posting, just in case that posting disappears:

"Journalism in China: Reality and Patience"

Mouthpiece, propaganda -- the Chinese government obviously has much to learn about western political correctness.

I find the term "patience" realistic, and "procrastinating" unfair.

I believe that China should have invited reputable media outlets like BBC and CNN into Tibet so that they can report on the "protects" "protests" as well as ordinary Tibetans -- not just those who beat people up in the streets. They don't need to worry about the safety of reporters in Tibet any more than the Americans in Iraq. I can understand why the Chinese government is so timid but don't see a reason for them to be.

Journalism in China: Reality and Patience



今天在 Google Reader 上读到《Root causes in Tibet》跟着读到华盛顿邮报上 Abrahm Lustgarten 的《What They're Really Fighting for in Tibet》,写得还有点意思。

“The Chinese had taken sledgehammers to large swaths of Lhasa's historic streets -- narrow cobblestone alleys pinned in by 400-year-old whitewashed buildings. They replaced entire neighborhoods with hastily built office buildings and dreary shops with all the hospitality of self-storage units. A $10 million shopping complex, its five stories bedecked in glass and billboards of scantily clad underwear models, opened blocks from the Jokhang. (The complex was torched in the protests.) Chinese dominated all sectors of the economy; they sold all the fruit, drove most of the taxis and mined all the minerals. And finally, in July 2006, the acclaimed Qinghai-Tibet railway opened for service, a transformation that released the floodgates.”
不知道别人的感觉如何,我读完这段的印象是全中国的人民(The Chinese)都扛着大锤到拉萨去砸那儿的街道去了。先不说在中国藏人也是 Chinese,他们还享有一些一般的汉人没有的权益,现在在中国并非只有汉人去拉萨,在北京的街上也同样有新疆人卖烤羊肉串、开店,即使汉人在拉萨垄断了水果和计程车生意,这也都是“Chinese”的错吗?不尽然吧?中国不应该修青藏铁路,而应该让西藏在高原上呆着,让藏人永远生活在与世隔绝的“香格里拉”幻境?

也许有很多在西藏发生了的事情不应该发生,拉萨的街道应该保有西藏的人文风格,但是这恐怕是当地政府的失责更多些。许多事按照美国这个民主社会的准则应该靠法律法规来解决,而不是靠杀人、放火。否则的话,北京人也可以到前门大街上放火烧了 KFC 的店了。中国有无穷多的事可以做得更好,包括政府对于人权的态度,急待改进。但是,杀人放火就是杀人放火,怎么修饰也还是杀人放火。
“China has consistently pursued a policy of "taming" its far-flung western regions through economic and ethnic assimilation. It has crafted tax incentives to encourage Han business owners to move west from eastern cities and has loosened migration rules. "Go West, Young Han" is the clarion call of the times. Chinese state-run firms have staffed large construction projects such as the railway and even local road building with Han Chinese contractors and crews, who send their earnings home.”
不知道文章的作者有没有跟汉人聊过这个问题,不知道有多少汉人愿意离乡背井到西藏高原去生活。至少我这个 Chinese 如果要下决心到西藏去安家的话,绝对不会是一个轻易的决定。中国是有鼓励去西藏投资的政策,不过即便如此,我想这种政策鼓励的不是“汉人”而是“资本”。如果西方真的关心藏人的福祉,在高喊人权和宗教自由口号的同时,不如也鼓励一下外面世界的资本到西藏去。我想那才是真正对于生活在西藏的藏人的关爱。



今天是美军入侵伊拉克第六年的开始。CNN 在播一个片子《Shock and Awe -- 5 Years Later》,刚刚播完,Anderson Cooper 说,五年前谁也没想到这一战会打这么久,而五年之后我们又会怎样,谁也无法预料。我反感这种说法。真的没有人预料到五年之后会是今天这种样子吗?事实并非如此,至少 NPR 就报道过几个前 CIA 分析师的预测分析,其准确程度让人吃惊。

翻看我自己的笔记,2004 年 4 月 9 日有这么一段:
“ 猜测一下伊拉克的未来,不难看到最好与最坏的结局。最好的结局,就是伊拉克再出现一个强人,能够镇住暴乱的各方,然后出现的伊拉克国家或许分裂,或许保持统一,或许变成伊斯兰国家,或许真的出现民主——尽管可能性极小。而最坏的结局,恐怕伊拉克斯四分五裂,内战云起,而伊斯兰极端份子乘虚而入,建立基地,制造事端。”
今天看伊拉克的局势,似乎介于我估计的最好与最坏之间,但是偏坏的一端更多。美军在伊拉克的数量尚足够维持大的局面。但是今年总统大选民主党胜出的机会极大,这样明年开始美军从伊拉克开始减防势在必行,如果 Obama 当选,撤军的速度大概会更快一些。这样一来,伊拉克目前的政府能否控制局面,看好的人大概不多。




早上从 BBC World 的广播里面听到一点西藏的消息,有目击报道中国的武警紧急反应部队大量往西藏和边缘省区增兵。BBC 的报道说甘肃也有藏人抗议活动,但是 BBC 报道本身似乎平淡一些了。


昨天和今天,断续读完了 Michael ParentiFriendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth。确实是很值得一读的文章,不过他整篇的叙述、评论,与他最后的结束语却有极大的矛盾:“If China is the great success story of speedy free market development, and is to be the model and inspiration for Tibet’s future, then old feudal Tibet indeed may start looking a lot better than it actually was.” 也许是他对中国不顾一切的急速发展带来对自然与人文环境的破坏有切齿痛恨,“But still, a gouged eye is a gouged eye; a flogging is a flogging; and the grinding exploitation of serfs and slaves is a brutal class injustice whatever its cultural wrapping.” 这些都是他的原话。

今天也读了 Joshua Michael Schrei 写的《A Lie Repeated - The Far Left’s Flawed History of Tibet》,觉得水平很低。首先,他卷首引用的那句“谎言重复一千遍就变成真理”不是“毛主席语录”,一上来就这么生搬硬套,后面能有什么高见也就可想而知了。



西藏的情形今天不知道怎么样了。前几天在 BBC 网站上看到一点视频,感觉悲哀。这件事挑头的不知道是什么人,但是从 BBC 看到的藏人满街追打汉人,抢东西,烧商店,觉得这种“抗议”无疑是挑动共产党出动军队,而挑起这种“抗议”活动的人别有用心。当时在 BBC 的 Have Your Say 页面上发了一番评论。不知是我没有登录还是怎么,我的评论没有登出来。当时写了老长,今天没兴趣再去写了。

BBC 的《Q&A: China and Tibet》里面有这么一段:“Many Tibetans are angry at the increasing numbers of Han Chinese migrants arriving in the region, accusing them of taking the best jobs.” 估计在拉萨街头被追打的汉人就是藏人这种“angry”的发泄对象。如果这样,这些藏人更不知是受了什么人的蛊惑。我想,在街头开店的汉人不是到西藏去抢藏人工作的,他们大概也是为生计所迫,或者是为机会所吸引的普通生意人。

那天就在心里对达赖喇嘛对拉萨“抗议”活动的一面之词有些疑惑,今天在 BBC 果然看到达赖喇嘛出来表示如果拉萨的暴力活动不停止,他就辞职。达赖喇嘛的政治手腕果然圆滑,而中国政府相对之下显得愚笨而蛮横。中国嚷嚷“与国际接轨”许多年了,却对国际舞台上的游戏规则如此生疏,让人只有为他们遗憾。

在评论中看到有人推荐两篇东西,一是《Tibet Through Chinese Eyes》,一是《Friendly Fuedalism - The Tibet Myth》。看了看,还真的是有点意思。

Peter Hessler 在《Tibet Through Chinese Eyes》里写道:“ Talking with these young men was in many ways similar to talking with an idealistic volunteer in any part of the world. Apart from the financial incentive to work in Tibet, many of the motivations were the same -- the sense of adventure, the desire to see something new, the commitment to service.” 我自己也曾有过这样的经历。曾经遇到过一位女孩,当年她的美丽让二十岁的我几乎不敢直视,至今记忆尤深。第二次见到她的时候,她送他的新婚丈夫去西藏支教。他们两人让我感受到的是一种自知自觉的献身与涉险的精神。

...... To be continued ......


Media Bias and Objectivity

Media bias was the topic of discussion on CNN last night. Biased or not, is not really the most important issue. To be completely without bias is likely extremely difficult if not impossible. The most important aspect of a media outlet is its objectivity.

Here is an example of what I mean by objectivity: I have been watching CNN for the last hour or so. Wolf Blitzer on The Situation Room repeatedly used the word desperately, as in "desperately desperately", in describing one of the Democratic candidates. That goes against my understanding of objectivity. What I want from the media, CNN included, is the facts -- nothing more, nothing less. Desperate or not, I believe I can make that judgement myself.

Be objective first. Then talk about bias. No dramatic entertainment necessary.


Change is not enough!

Barak Obama's motto for his campaign is Change. That has attracted much of the votes to his camp. Yet for me, change is not enough. I want progress.

Change is not necessarily progress. It only means to be different. Dramatic changes often brings swing motion, slowing down progress forward. This country needs moderation at this point. That may sound counter-intuitive, but is a core concept in the Confucius philosophy.

Maybe I am showing my age. Maybe it's because I have seen charisma induced disaster. I have become wary of people with flashy words. The wisdom of Confucius shows through his plain spoken language.

Anyway, the two Democratic candidates are both capable people to me. Even John McCain could make a good president. Too bad that he is a Republican.