==+==+==+== C h i n e s e C o m m u n i t y F o r u m ==+==+==+=== Wednesday, May 4, 1994 (Issue No. 9422) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Chinese Community Forum (CCF) is an e-journal published on China-Net. CCF is dedicated to the discussion on the issues related to the Chinese community. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of the Editorial Board of CCF. Contributions to the discussions and suggestions of new topics are very much appreciated. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= # of Table of Contents Author | Lines ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 1. On Real Politics and Human Rights............................Kan Liao 206 2. Post-Deng Era..................................................Lu Ren 104 3. Beyond Zhao Hua's Case................................... Yungui Ding 91 4. The Other Side of CCF (with an Editor's Note).............Jinghong Li 115 5. Do Chinese Know Better than Americans about the Outside?.....Mi Mi Sr. 10 6. Ph.D 'Hat' etc..............................................Anzhi Lai 30 ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== -- From The Editor -- In this issue, we carry an array of articles discussing variety of topics. The first article by Mr. Kan Liao discusses the recent controversy on Michael Fay's caning sentence in Singapore and its political implications. This interesting questions about surrounding the controversy as discussed in the article are, among other things, how we regard the law in other country. We hope this article will intrigue more thoughts on this issue. Next article by Mr. Lu Ren foresees some possible senariors of China's strong-man politics in the near future. This article poses some interesting points on China's political future. Can strong-man politics survive for long? What are the societal and political bases for such a governmental form? If such form still survives for a long, then what is the future perspective of democracy in China? We hope our readers join in the discussion. Our fellow student Mr. Zhao Hua's tragic death has come as a shock to our community. It reveals that Hippocratic Oath has been dangerously forgotten by some doctors at home. How do we react to such a tragedy? We hope our readers express their opinions on this issue. Here we carry Mr. Yungui Ding's article to discuss other issues associated with Zhao Hua's case. We also carry a reader' criticism on the functioning of CCF. One reader share with us his thought on cultural understanding of outside world. Mr. Anzhi Lai told his story about the life in the U.S. as a Ph.D. student. ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 1. On Real Politics and Human Rights............................Kan Liao 206 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Before getting into my topic, I would like to comment on the Michael Fay article by Mr. K.C.Zhang. In the article, Mr. Zhang unequivocally states that M. Fay is a victim based on a definition in the dictionary. That is quite a big mistake. I will not get into how valid it is to conclude something by merely a dictionary definition. Let's get into the definition itself. In the dictionary, it says that a victim is the ONE who suffers bala, bala, bala. The point here is the definition of the ONE. The One here certainly implies an innocent person, not a convicted criminal under the punishment of law. Based on the logic Mr. K.C.Zhang used, a convicted murderer sentenced to death is also a victim and much more a victim than Fay, because he is the one who will lose his life. That is ... Well, I do not wish to print it here. I do hope next time people should double check their basic assumption. For M. Fay, based on Singapore law which is just as sacred and valid to the Singapore people as any law in this country to the U.S. people, he is convicted (read convicted) by the Singapore court as a criminal to have committed vandalism. Thus, M. Fay no longer enjoys the so called presumed innocent. He is complied to accept the punishment described by the law after all the legal process. No human rights violation at all. Then, is the Singapore law a violation of human right? For this question there is no factual statement answer. Anyone who claim that the law violates the human rights in Singapore is merely stating their own value judgement. They may enlist number of example, but the conclusion is always a value judgement, not a factual statement. That's that, 1 2 3 in logics. So, is that the value judgement over the existing law? The law is passed by the Singapore people. No outside has any right to change it. If a person's or a group of people's value judgement, which may well be flawed, could overrule the law, then it is the minority rule, isn't it? To try to supersede the law with a few people's value judgement is the greatest violation of human rights. An old Chinese saying: lift the stone to hammer one's own feet. For the punishment of criminal act, Victor Hugo in his masterpiece Les Miserables condemned the punishment. Instead he chose the moral salvation as the proper way. Well, by all my heart, I am glad to know that his view is only shared by a few moralists today. Otherwise, I will not be able to sit here to write this article. I will be running around to avoid be killed or try to kill someone. Crime and punishment, it is the soup of the day. Moral salvation may be the soup for tomorrow. But I have no stomach for it today. For human rights violation, it is just a mere coincidence that generally the accusers belong to those powerful nations and the accused are the weak ones. There is a time proven doctrine that the weak nations and its people are more dangerous because they possess more destructive power to the human civilization. So, they should be destroyed in order to save the civilization. This view was held until about 50 years ago, because its chief believer, great Britain, barely escaped its own destruction. Comes the Uncle Sam, more powerful and tactical than John Bull. Uncle Sam believes that the weak ones are not that dangerous to destroy the civilization (it is us, the good guy, who has the most A-bomb). But they are still dangerous. For one thing they are often in our way to obtain our goods and spread our human rights. Thus, they need to be constantly reminded and sanctioned. For that, they will remain to be the weak ones which are their chief existing value. If the tension inside uncle Sam is too high, they are very good ventilation duct. Our top gunners can pin-point their missiles with very minimum collateral damage, say a few hundred thousands civilians death. Any way, says uncle Sam, You have high fertility rate, so, it is easy to replace them. Or maybe, your nation is so populous that you will not even notice it at all. In the worst case, if we did not kill you, you will still be killed by your dictator. All we did is to improve your human rights, and we have that moral authority thing too. Didn't you hear our politicians always say God Bless American? They have God's phone number and they are assured by God. If you still do not believe, our journalists have all the proof and will give it to you even though you do not need it. Hard to argue with that hun? If you dare to speak your thought and disagree with us, you are a narrow nationalist. My heart is bleeding. Universal human rights, how many innocent people lost their life under that holy phrase! What are human rights? In the eyes of Uncle Sam and his followers, they are the absolute individual rights. In the eyes of those Chinese HR- and D-fighters, they are the rights of those dissidents to irresponsibly propagandize the American ideology. I did not see a single twitch of Uncle Sam when he put his name on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, even though his country was still segregated. The paper is white, so are human rights. Ever since the British led the way into China in the last century in the name of God to promote the liberty, freedom and prosperity in China and for the Chinese people, we Chinese people had lived under the constant pressure of the so called universal human rights. It boiled down to simple essence that we Chinese people could not live in our own history, our own time, our own culture and our own tradition. They gave us all the goods of the human rights and we were supposed to be better off. What did we get? I see that our national treasures, precious art and cultural works were disappearing in China and reappearing in the museums of London, Paris, New York etc. I have a thought. Can we also give them some rights, so we can have some Michelangelo's? I like them. If it is illegal as I was told, well then I will remember that. After some 150 years of humiliation, we Chinese people now start to enjoy some human rights as real human being not someone's hand-offs as animals. This deeply alarmed many of our alert human rights "guardians". What on the earth does this suppose to happen? There must be grave human rights violations. Otherwise, this can not be happening. Therefore, spun out of nowhere we see one of the most bizarre coalition in which it has Uncle Sam, the champion fighter, Chris Patten, the remnant of colonialism, Dalai Lama, the religious god figure and some of our beloved colleagues, the saviors of Chinese human rights. To the credit of Uncle Sam, he has been remarkably consistent in his saying and doing in the past century. The only problem is that his doing is not always consistent with his saying, especially when the receiving ends happen to be located in Asia, Africa or South America. For Uncle Sam, what Richelieu wrote some 300 years ago fits him best: "In the matter of states, he who has the power often has the right, and he who is weak can only with difficulty keep from being wrong in the opinion of the majority of the world." Chris Patten, trying to be bullish in the wrong place and at the wrong time. (Should watch the U.S. TV. like "Merrill Lynch: Be Bullish on the Future, Not Now") Well the name Chris does not help much. If he did what he is doing now at 100 years or 50 years even 25 years ago, he still would have added some glory to her majesty's crown. But not now as the last Governor General. He should have known that Hong Kong is not Falkland Island. Looks like American students are not the only ones having poor geographic knowledge not that it matters. I really do not believe that a weasel with a fresh chicken feather sticking on its nose claims that it has never eaten and will never eat chicken. Maybe a famous Los Angeles jury will give it the benefit of doubt, but not me. Dalai Lama, here is a mystic person or spirit or both. I am confused here. From my very limited religious knowledge which I find in my attic, I thought Dalai Lama is not a real person, rather He is the holy spiritual soul who transfer after the current human carrier dies. Thus, the person we see as Dalai Lama is a mere carrier. The important one is the spiritual soul which has been worshiped. This religious faith is fine with me. However, what troubles me is that the democracy and human rights are the worldly things, see it is the HUMAN rights. I have a very difficult time to understand why His holy spiritual soul is arguing with us the lowly human beings over the dirty worldly things. If it is the person carrier who is doing the talk, then I would like to see him to transfer His holy spiritual soul first. Thus, the person, now free of the holy title, can enjoy the worldly thing, name arguing. Otherwise, I can not argue with His holy spirit. This put us the human in a not very amiable position. By the way, I think I once read that all men are created equal is the basis of ] the democracy. I find that the Dala Lama person at the present state with that His holy spiritual soul is not created equally with us. Only after he transfers His spirit, we are equal. Before that, forgive me, Thou holy spiritual soul. Now back to our world. For our beloved colleagues. They are constantly buzzing beside my ears about the grievous conditions of the human rights in China and how miserable the Chinese people under the government as if I am not from China, not lived there for over 20 years and not have my own eyes and ears to know China myself. They constantly remind me that what they have done and are doing are all for the better of China, better of the Chinese people and better of my interests; are for the human rights in China, for a free government in which people like me will have a chance to be a president. All in all, it is for me or the like (if any one wish to identify with me) the brain-washed Chinese moron who have no idea about what's so ever democracy or human rights. I am always being swiped off my feet by such a declaration of altruism. I, in my 30-some years of life, am always believe myself as well-educated, intelligent, ethical and having seen one thing or two. In all my life, I have to use all my faculty in order to advance myself without hurting someone else, their rights and interests and my own conscience. I find it is very difficult and I am barely getting by. Now I have been told someone can do all the good things for me and more without advancing their own interests, their well being and their own gaining. Even give me a theoretical chance to be a president. Thanks but no thanks. It is too good to be true. This reminds me of a used car dealer trying to sell me a second-hand (could be nth-hand) Hyundai. He described the car (if it could still be called car) as good as a brand-new Mercedes. Luckily, I knew the difference of H and M. Now I am being offered a brand-new Mercedes by my beloved colleagues at the price of a second-hand Hyundai. Should I take it? Do I believe in human rights? Certainly. I believe that human rights are not equal to individual rights definitely not the American styled capricious and overzealous individual rights. I believe human rights shall have individual rights, individual responsibilities, collective rights and collective responsibilities. I believe individual responsibilities shall not be replaced by so called rights. I do not believe the good old U.S. of A is the defender of human rights and certainly I do not believe China is a grave human rights violator. In a better world, we shall not fear being harassed by authority, and equally important we shall not fear being victimized by crimes. In a better world, the criminals like Michael Fay will get their deserved punishments, not like Rodney King is exalted by NAACP as civil rights fighter and is awarded $3.8 million tax dollars without being punished for his part. In a better world, people shall act responsibly not capriciously to their fellow human beings. In a better world, the music which inspires us shall be those of Beethevon's not those of Kurt Cobain's. In a better world, weak ones shall not that often be wronged by the strong ones. In a better world, the democratic forms of government shall include all the forms of representative government not just the popular contested form. In a better world, human rights shall be defined by all the people on the earth not just less than 10% of the people in those powerful nations. The Song of May Morning by John Milton: Now the bright morning star, Dayes harbinger, Comes dancing from the East, and leads with her The Flowery May, who from her green lap throws The yellow Cowslip, and the pale Primrose. Hail bounteous May that dost inspire Mirth and Youth, and warm desire, Woods and Groves, are of thy blessing, Hill and Dale, doth boast thy blessing. Thus we salute thee with our early Song, And welcome thee, and wish thee long. Life is beautiful, isn't it? Cherish your most fundamental rights: the right to life. (Received: 29-APR-1994) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 2. Post-Deng Era.................................................Lu Ren 104 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the very near future, we will enter post-Deng era. What will happen then? Who will be the next political strong man? The question will haunt Chinese people into the next century although they do not have much voice in it. Chinese politics has always been strong man politics and behind the black curtain. Only a small number of powerful figures will determine the future of China. Here I just present some possibilities. The worst situation is warlordism. After Qing, local warlords controlled the divided territories and made Chinese suffering. The memory is still vivid for many old people. The root of warlordism is the combining political and military power in late Qing. When the Qing Court lost its power, the local warlords mushroomed and sought their own territories. Therefore, the key to prevent future warlordism is to centralize the military power. As long as the central government controls the military power, there is little danger in future warlordism. Therefore, the first and foremost issue for Chinese, no matter what political stands they hold, is to prevent the splitting of military troops and prevent internal war. Bloodsheding will bring nobody good except for a small member of warlords or some supreme rulers like Chiang Kai-shek and Mao Zhe-dong. The second issue is who will be the next strong man? The recent history of China is dominated by a few strong men or women. First, Cixi then Yuan Shikai then Chiang Kai-shek then Mao Zhe-dong then Deng Xiao-ping. So, who will be next? Jiang Zhe-ming? Every political strong man of China is dependent on the loyalty of its military troops. Cixi depended on its Ba Qi Troop. Yuan Shikai depended on his Bei Yang troops. Chiang Kai-shek depended on his Huang Pu troops. Mao Zhe-dong depended on Lin Biao first for taking over Dongbei; then in Culture revolution, he depended Lin Biao on the firm control of military so he began culture revolution and used Red Guards to kick Liu Shao-qi, Deng Xiao-ping and other political leaders out of power. Deng Xiao-ping depended on his secondary military group to control the military. So, personal loyalty of military troops will be the key for the future political strong man. This personal loyalty depends on long term warfare in the past or long term personnel control. Obviously, Jiang has neither. Although he has the title for the party, state and the military, he does not have personal loyalty of his subordinates. Therefore, he is susceptible to be overthrown like Hua Guo-feng. When he is gone, nobody will miss him. The fault he committed is his own. He is always trying to please both the hardliners and reformers. He does not have his own agenda. Therefore, he commands the loyalty of neither groups. Very possibly he is more conservative than most people thought. The second man is Li Peng. Although everyone hated him, we can not underestimate his political power base. He is a part of hardliners. But ten years vice premier and premier gave him a lot political bases in the bureaucratic system. No matter who will be the next strong man, he has to get his political support. However, unless he got a powerful military ally and changes his political course to more reform minded, he will have difficult to be the supreme power. The third man on the list is Qiao Shi. Long time controller of Chinese internal security system, he has both the political and military power. He is reform minded, he is a current political bureau member. His change depends on his skill in the future political struggle and a military ally. The fourth man is Zhao Zhi-yang. He commands the respect of ordinary Chinese people for his refuse to commit troops in Tian An Meng Square. He also has many backers in the party and adminstrative system. The one he lacks is current political title like Deng Xiao-ping before he came to power. His come back depends on the reversal of the conclusion for Tian An Meng Square incident which will win him the popularity in ordinary Chinese and international community. He also needs the back of military approval. But more important for him is the political support within the party. Through the silent approve of military commanders and the active support the party leaders, he can come back to reclaim the political title and push out Jiang Zhe-ming. Then who is the military key? I think it is still Yang Shang-kun. Although he has released all the military titles, long time work in the military will give him a lot of clouds in his former subordinates. He is the key for the future power transition. Without his blessing, any political move will be very difficult. He may act the role of Ye Jian-yin in overthrowing the Gang of Four. However, such dramatic military coup will be unlikely for the future. The key role for him to play is to try to prevent the use of military force by Jiang to achieve his own rule, therefore, to open the way for the next leader. Although the strong-man politics is inevitable for the forseeable future, the less power he has, the better for the future of China and Chinese people. When a person has absolute power, no counterbalance, if he is right, the result will be great such as Mao Zhe-dong after Zunyi Meeting. However, when he is wrong, the result will be disastrous. Just look at the devastating result of the Great Leap and Culture Revolution. So, the dominant but not absolute power of the next political leader will benefit China the most. Demacracy will have a long long way to go. The economic reform and the political and economic policies of the next ten years will affect the next century of China. The key is to control the inflation and feed Chinese people and ensure social stability. However, the long term key for the economic success of China is how to transform the inefficient Chinese state-own economy to private economy without political instability. It needs a lot of political skills, propaganda and a strong political leader to silence the hardline leftists. Essentially, it has to end the political wrong way of the past thirty year Chinese history. Socialist will die sooner or later. But how to change the world's largest socialist state to a capatalist economic power is the most daunting task of the next political leader. The hardwork will be payed off. Since Qing, Chinese always wants to be a world power. The dream has never come true. Will it come true in the next century? We will see. I hope oversea Chinese at least have some serious discussions about the future of China besides the busy working life in the west. (Received: 20-APR-1994) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 3. Beyond Zhao Hua's Case................................... Yungui Ding 91 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Editor's note: This article is modified from one the author sent to an IFCSS discussion network regarding Zhao Hua's case. The author agrees to publish on CCF.] Dear folks, I am glad, and moved, to see the response from the IFCSS activists about the unfortunate death of Zhao Hua. I think as a group we have made a good move. However, I would like to speak a few more words beyond this case. Recently, two cases reported by CND have caught much of my attention. The more recent one was Zhao Hua's case. Zhao Hua, a student of University of Wisconsin-Madison visited home and died in a Shanghai hospital due to mistreatment. Afterwards, the hospital first partly admitted their fault but then denied any responsibility for the death. [See CND-US April 27, 1994 issue.] With a valuable and invaluable young life lost to the insensitivity and irresponsibility of the hospital, I am shocked and saddened. We couldn't do more than enough for the case. I appreciate that some friends have taken the initiative and duty to work on it. Another case, I am not sure how many of you have noticed it, is Deng Yuming's litigation case. [See CND-US April 3, 1994 issue.] The poor guy was involved in a car accident, and it was the other party's fault. But that other party accused Deng of assault, which turned out to be a sheer lie. With several witnesses volunteering to testify in favor of Deng, the criminal charge against Deng was formally withdrawn by the prosecutor, but the question remains: is the justice done? This case can not compare with the the former one, since an invaluable human life was involved in the former. However, in terms of justice, I view the two equally important for our CSS community to seek a "Shuo Fa" (Qiu Ju's word: "explanation" or "justice"). I suggest those who are not aware of these two cases to read the CND reports and think about it. CND-US is also expected to have follow-ups. I think that to serve the community in various ways is a right direction organizations such as IFCSS should pursue. We may want to take advantage of the foundation of the CSS organizations and do what others could not do. In every sense, Deng's case, as well as Zhao Hua's case, deserves our attention. Let me extend a little bit. When a friend commented on one of my messages which he thought was outrageous, he said he did not blame me, but blame CCP. I appreciate his kindness to not blame his fellow club member harshly, but I don't think that statement is right. I want to say: as an adult man in 30s, I am solely responsible for my own words and behavior, and I believe all others should be, too. Shall we blame CCP for everything we might be doing wrong? Probably not, although that is an easy way out. What I am getting at is: I don't completely agree with the assertion that we should attribute Zhao Hua's death to the government's fault. That would be too easy an excuse for us to find and attack and we would be too hypocritical by doing so. If we really want to blame something big, I would blame the society as a whole, which include the governmental structure and governing principles AND the beliefs and attitude of the common people. Of the common people! If we want to "Shang Gang Shang Xian" (escalate to principles) to the level of Human Rights (HR), which I also think is appropriate, I would say, HR issue is not just a matter of government's attitude, it is also a matter of the common people's attitude. It is not a matter of government's arresting/ releasing game, it is more a matter of education of the common people. The second point I am getting at is: from my observation, we are more ready to attack the Chinese government, or Chinese community, or Chinese individuals, than we would do non-Chinese groups or individuals in such cases. I don't believe that's only because of political needs (I do think it is partly so--often, we intentionally or unintentionally more politically oriented), it may also be because we find it easier to allege/attack something we are so familiar with. It would be much bigger a challenge to accuse others outside our community, to seek justice outside the Chinese circle, and win it, based on principles. Compare the responses from the two cases, although I know the cases themselves are not comparable in some sense. I have seen the IFCSS activists responding much more strongly and promptly to Zhao Hua's case. To stand up for Zhao Hua's death is a good thing for us to do, but I hope we could do more and better. While I support any effort to seek justice for Zhao Hua and his family, I challenge everyone, everyone, to help Deng's case to seek justice, too! One is with a society we are familiar with but relatively law-less; the other is with a society which we may not familiar with, and we may not feel so tightly bonded to, but there is a well-established justice system that we can use. Both are challenging. Both are worthwhile! To play in an old playground is not that much; to explore into a new arena, to challenge ourselves with new variables, and to add to our community a new dimension, may be something. Thank you for your attention. Yungui (Received: 1-MAY-1994) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 4. The Other Side of CCF....................................Jinghong Li 115 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Having read the latest CCF package about China-net and CCF itself, I am surprised to find out that the CCF Editors forgot to tell its readers the whole story. Given the importance of the missing information to the public in general and CCF readers in particular, I hope the following will not only provide some answers to why and how the CCF is as of its current state, but also how to correct those mistakes. But first, the good part of CCF's contribution to CSS are appreciated for sure. 1. CCF Belongs to a Closed 'Elite' Group If one got the impression that CCF's Editor Board is formed by 'volunteers' who are willing to serve the CSS community, and hence anyone could join them to contribute, think it again. The fact which 'FAQ about CCF' didn't tell is -- editors are admitted on an Invitational Basis Only. So, don't be surprised if your cherishing volunteerism being rejected. Here is my personal experience with CCF. Not long after the close of China-net, I wrote to China-net Management Committee volunteered to help. Weihe Guan, the list-owner wrote back telling me there is nothing to do in the committee since all mails are now automatically forwarded to the newly formed CCF Editorial Board. And she told me that CCF is very much in need of help. So, I wrote to CCF for at least three times. A month later, an editor finally told me to contribute articles instead. I wrote back saying I had even more energy than just 'arguing' with people, and volunteered again to do anything to help. Another month later, he responded by telling me the rejection. Well, there is nothing wrong for any one or group to form a public serves publications in this free country and on the supposed-to-be-public info-carrier China-net, unless, yes, unless they pretend to be something they are not. Maybe now the 85% pro-editor opinion ration makes more sense to readers? Anyone interested in finding out who the 21 lucky editors are? 2. CCF Is the Editors' Forum If not seen in person, people might have a hard time to believe that a public publication carries not only contributions from readers and editorial notice/statements, but articles of its own editors. To make it more interesting, CCF often carries the Executive Editor's own articles on his/her own package criticizing those who have no way of responding. Given the fact that all Editors are invited, and most of the articles on CCF are written by them, it sort of remind people the 'Party Paper' we are all so familiar with in China. Of course, CCP don't bother to pretend otherwise. I am not saying that CCF Editors are bad people. No, they might just be the perfect people in the world. What makes the situation wrong is their way of 'serving' us. 3. CCF and China-net - Hijacked by Each Other Intentionally or not, China-net, given its current status, is in a strange relationship with CCF. By its original goal of establishment, China-net was meant to provide a public channel to the general CSS community for information exchange. No matter open, or monitored, or closed, the only and last important principle should be 'a balanced and fair information carrier.' However, since the latest reform on China-net, the fact is either CCF hijacked China-net or the other way around -- neither of them is balanced nor fair to its readers. As a carrier, China-net is supposed to give all CSS groups the equal access. But strangely enough, all mails to China-net are now being automatically turned to the CCF Editor Board. Given the fact that most of the China-net management committee members are either CCF members or ceased functioning, no wonder the two seemed are hijacking each other, of course, with pleasure and claim doing the general public a favor. 4. China-net's Obligation and Possible Legal Problems There is no doubt that people should appreciate Weihe Guan, the China-net list-owner, for setup China-net five years ago. In the meantime, Ms Guan and her management committee are also obligated to live up to China-net's original goal and purpose. The public readers might not aware the process of establishing such a public/education/information related mailing list in this country. Potentially, every one who is associated with a educational organization, which happens to have computer internet listserv service available, can apply for such a network. Normally, you have to show the need for educational and informational exchange in a certain group and you will be accountable for serving the net's purpose and following the network rules. Given the current situation on China-net, its original functions have been changed by the strange relationship with the CCF Editor Board. It is fairly safe to say China-net management committee, Ms Guan in particular, will have a hard time explaining to the University of Georgia authority if anyone complains with good reasons. 5. Time for Correct the Wrongs By all means, not all things are wrong with China-net and CCF. I as one of the readers appreciated the efforts and many good works done by China-net managers as well as the CCF editors. However, errors and wrongs cannot can be ignored. In order to make both a better service to readers, I propose the following changes. a. Separate China-net from CCF Editor Board, or the other way around if you prefer. China-net should remain a monitored net because the limited traffic and relatively higher quality posts are obviously liked by the majority readers. Mails send to China-net should be screened by a monitor group set up by the China-net managers. Contributions to CCF should be direct to CCF's own email address, or forwarded to CCF only if the senders so desire. b. CCF Editor Board should either change its 'invitation only' policy, or state clearly that CCF stands for its editors' opinion instead of pretending to represent the general CSS community's interests. Thanks for your attention. <3dsys!jli@uunet.UU.NET> (Received: 3-MAY-1994) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Editor's Note: We appreciate Mr. Jinghong Li's candid criticism toward CCF. We are also more than willing to consider his constructive suggestions. As always, we welcome any criticism and suggestion to further improve CCF. We would also like to take this chance to clarify some points to our readers: 1) Every magazine has its own columnists/editors, even for public forums There is no exception to CCF. Our off-duty editors also serve as columnists. However, we do set higher priority to our readers contributions. 2) Volunteerism does not mean that everybody can join in if they wish. Besides some technical requirement, editorial work is a team work, therefore any candidate is normally evaluated on his potentiality in the teamwork. Invitational standard is surely subjective, but to ensure proper functioning of the Editorial Board, it is neccesary. 3) Almost all articles (except some trial messages) have been published by CCF/CCB. If any unbalance tells anything to our readers, it just reveals either the reality or the lack of contributions from one particular side certain readers favor. 4) Related to point 3), some IFCSSers accuse CCF of anti-IFCSS. Since we published nearly all articles we have received so far, we leave it to our readers to judge whether or not CCF publishes unfair or unduly criticism toward IFCSS, or some people are just allergic to criticism. 5) Our editorial board in nowhere claims that we represent other people or pretend to do so, as Mr. Li said. CCF is just a journal. All articles speak only for themselves. Again, we leave it to our readers to judge the truth. We hope our readers send us your thought on the functioning of CCF. ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 5. Do Chinese Know Better than Americans about the Outside?.....Mi Mi Sr. 10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, I do not think so. The majority Chinese are living in the countryside. When I was re-educated in one village, the farmers was suprised when Combadia was involved in Viet. War. They said "oh, there is a place in China called Combadia!". The villagers were all immigrants from Shandong. They believed all us the cityboys and citygirls from Shanghai, Beijing were seeking better lives in their village just like them, because there was nothing to eat in the big cities! There were hardly few children who could go to local highschools. Of course we CSS, a handful of Chinese elite, may have known outside better than ordinary American folks have known their outside, but that is hardly the relevant comparison. (Received: 27-APR-1994) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. Ph.D, Life, etc.............................................Anzhi Lai 30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear ****, How do you feel now to have a new 'hat' -- Ph.D.? Probably not too much, is it? But, congratulations!! Incidentally, let me tell you a story about having a Ph.D. Recently, I met an old friend of mine from China. He asked me what I have been doing these years. I told him that I was doing research on neutron (Zhong1 Zi3) physics working in a national lab. He said with the unique humorous tone of Sichuanese, 'Aha! Another piece of smart and expensive junk (Cong1 Ming2 Ang2 Gui4 de Fei4 Wu4). You know, Li3 Zheng4 Dao4 kept talking about Li2 Zi3 (pears) some years ago [his humor: Li2 Zi3 -> Li4 Zi3 (particle, which is what T.D.Lee has devoted his time to study)]. Now, he does not show up anymore, but you are telling us all about Zhong4 Zi3 [His humor here is: neutron (Zhong1 Zi3) -> Zhong4 Zi3, the food we eat on Duan1 Wu3 Jie2]. The time in China has long passed the point that people regard Li2 Zi3 and Zhong4 Zi3 as luxuries. You see, the capitalist America is so backward in comparison with our socialist China, they even gave you a Ph.D. for getting these useless things. If you were in China, you would have nothing to gain by selling Li2 Zi3 and Zhong4 Zi3...' I could not help laughing for quite a while, and felt some kind of lost with quite bit sadness afterwards! Don't get mad at me, your Ph.D. could be very valuable; but mine does not seem to be any of hope (a piece of Zhong4 Zi3 after all :-( ), although I was somewhat excited when my boss said as he stepped out the conference room where I defended my thesis, 'Congratulations, Anzhi, the newest Ph.D. in the world!'. What a sweet memory with a harsh reality! Just want to talk about something soft and mild. Again, Congratulations, Anzhi Lai (Received: 26-APR-1994) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++ + Executive Editor: Huang Tang Executive Moderator: Will Yang + +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + For subscription: mail "SUB CHINA-NT Your-First-Name Your-Last-Name" + + to LISTSERV@UGA (bitnet) or listserv@uga.cc.uga.edu (internet) + + For unsubscription: mail "UNSUB CHINA-NT" to the above e-address + + For back issues of CCF: + + anonymous ftp to: cnd.org[132.249.229.100]: pub/community/CCF + + gopher to cnd.org: 2. English Menu --> 13. Community --> 1. ccf + + For contribution and inquiry: mail to ccf-editor@ifcss.org + +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++