From @UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:owner-china-nt@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU Thu Jun 9 05:30:18 1994 Date: Thu, 9 Jun 1994 02:31:55 EDT Reply-To: Duh? Sender: China-Net From: Duh? Subject: Chinese Community Forum Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list CHINA-NT ==+==+==+== C h i n e s e C o m m u n i t y F o r u m ==+==+==+=== Wednesday, June 8, 1994 (Issue No. 9431) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= 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 ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== -*- After-after-thoughts And After-after-shocks -*- 1. You Are the Parents...........................................EBCCF 58 2. I Support IFCSS' Statement on MFN.......................Shengyi Guo 30 3. Crying and Whining....................................Newton X. Liu 122 4. Please Calm Down! -- Thoughts on CBS Issue..............Youming Wei 68 5. Shall We Join Force with Mexicans?........................Houpao Ma 44 6. Some Thoughts to Share.....................................Kan Liao 57 ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== -- From The Editor -- We have seen a few quite unusual events over the past two weeks. Though CCF has paid close attention to them and followed in a timely fashion, more follow-up issues seem to be in order as more articles keep pouring in. Hence this pot of stew -- a collection of contributions we have received during the past week regarding the MFN issue, the CBS report, and some reflections on some new news. Be forewarned, though, that a giganic issue is coming this weekend. The title? "After-after-after..." Yup, you guessed it. The Japanese Emperor will visit US late this week for the first time. The Chinese people in China are not allowed to express their feelings and demands regarding the disturbing trend of denying the crimes of the Japanese army during WWII in the new cabinet. We are fortunate to be exempt from that restriction, at least for the time being. Perhaps some would like to take advantage of the freedom to speak out. Therefore, we are planning to organize an issue around the relations between China and Japan, as well as between the two peoples. "Wait! The first item looks kinda suspicious...what's that about?" Well, you'll have to find out yourself... ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 1. You Are the Parents...........................................EBCCF 58 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- What makes CCF special, amongst numerous widely distributed electronic publications related to China and the overseas Chinese communities? The name, of course. CCF is a forum for discussion on issues of concern to the Chinese community everywhere. Therefore, the Editorial Board sees reader participation as the very life source for the publication. As a collective, the Board has little "political agenda" (see below). If a particular issue of CCF appears to lean towards one end of the spectrum, it is only due to the contributions we received during the preparation period for that issue. Occasionally, we do reach out and invite articles related to a particular theme from sources that we determine to be well qualified. We perceive this as a technique of quality control, and have been trying to minimize its usage. The message is very simple: if you think you have something worthwhile to yell out, type it up and mail it to ccf-editor@ifcss.org. You, the readers, shape, nurture, and raise this baby. You are the parents, while we, the editors, are kindergarden teachers. All posts will not be automatically accepted, however. As kindergarden teachers, we do have the right, as well as the responsibility, to prevent abuse from the parents, don't we? Nevertheless, please be assured that we have been trying to minimize the number of rejections as much as possible. The guideline is such that ONLY the following types of posts will be rejected: 1. SO POORLY written that it is beyond repair without significant amount of imagination on the editor's part. 2. of STRICTLY personal nature. 3. with OBVIOUS intention of seeking monetery gains. 4. containing UNMISTAKABLY discriminative or offensive messages. 5. deemed to be of INSIGNIFICANT concern to the Chinese community. In general, CCF is for discussions. Some posts, such as announcement of events, may be of interest to the community, though not of discussion type. Those posts will be published in Chinese Community Bulletin, a complementary journal to CCF. 6. ridiculously long. We realize that the current volume of CCF is already quite big. By all means, please try to limit your submission to be less than 100 lines in length. The shorter, the better. We hope the amount of "political agenda," or "censorship," reflected by the above criteria is acceptable to all the readers. *teeny print: while we will continue trying to provide a reply to every post we receive, we cannot quarantee so due to the simple reason of limited resources in time and manpower...oops, make that personpower?* To maintain a coherent appearance for the journal, we have been trying to focus every issue on a particular topic. Therefore, there could be a delay for your contribution to be published. We will announce our planned themes for the upcoming issue(s) in the "From The Editor" section. Besides contributions, your comments and suggestions regarding CCF are most welcome. Tell us how we have done taking care of your sweet little one. By the way, if you think CCF is worthy, twist your friends' arms and make'em subscribe. That's what friends are for, isn't it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. I Support IFCSS' Statement on MFN.......................Shengyi Guo 30 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Many people have expressed (openly) their approval of (or agreement with) Clinton's decision to renew MFN for China unconditionally and to de-link China's MFN with the human rights issue, as well as their disapproval of the IFCSS statement on the decision. The struggle for continuing (or discontinuing) China's MFN has been going on since the Tian'anmen Square democracy movement. Each year, right before the deadline for MFN extension, there was a debate in the US Congress. Conse- quently, the Chinese government (CG) made some nominal improvements in human rights by releasing a few prominent political prisoners. Do you think CG would have released Wei Jingsheng, Wang Juntao, and Chen Ziming voluntarily, without the MFN at stake? Neither US nor China can afford to lose MFN for China. It is the (low) likelihood of losing MFN that has kept CG releasing people like Wang Juntao every year. Just like driving on a highway -- it is the likelihood of having an accident that keeps us being good and alert drivers. Without the likelihood of an accident ever happening, what incentive do we have to be good drivers? Therefore it would have been a good policy (for human rights considerations) to attach some conditions to MFN. I support the IFCSS statement on Clinton's China policy. GIVEN that the UMFN policy has been already set by Clinton, I hope pressure on CG to improve human rights will be put through other channels. However I wish it were still possible to exert pressure through MFN. With the MFN pressure (as over the past few years), China got the full benefits of MFN, while nominal progress on human rights was made. With the current UMFN policy, of course China still gets the full benefits of MFN, but let us see what CG will do before June 4 next year. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Crying and Whining....................................Newton X. Liu 122 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Constructive Criticism Previously, I commented on Mr. Li Chenjian's article, "Separate Two Things" (see CCF #94?? and #94??). I am writing again because I feel that my comments might have sounded too negative, for which I apologize not only to Mr. Li Chenjian but also to all of you who have read my letter. I am not saying, however, that I was wrong. What I am confessing here is that my argument was not constructed out of prudence. When I read my letter in the subsequent issues of CCF, it striked the fear in me that a wave of disagreements might erupt among us, the Chinese students and scholars. I know how negative we can be towards each other. Or may I say that unity is not a strong suit of our national character in comparison with other Asians. Now facing a new challenge (CBS and Connie Chung) there is no need nor time for us to argue ourselves to death. That would never accomplish a thing. Should the trend be set, at least it should not be set by me. For the record, I had no intention nor right to shut up Li Chenjian. That would be a sin. It has been in my mind for some time that, if permissible, we should encourage every one in the community to speak his/her mind. For this reason I applauded Kan Liao's article on Michael Fay and human rights published in this wonderful Forum, though I am not in total agreement with the logic of his argument, and his way of presentation, in my humble opinion, actually weakened the overall appeal. In the same token, I also enjoyed Andy Shi's letter to the editor of May 31, not the least because his article was critical of Li Chenjian's article. As a student of rhetoric I marvel at how much we can learn by making responsible comments. If we operate on the premise that no one has the intention to terminate others' opinions, we are bond to benefit a great deal from other comments and critique, or constructive criticism. It does only harm to one's health to keep everything to oneself all the time. Let me put into words here to compliment this fabulous Forum because it has on many occasions created some marvelous scenes in which the rambunctious ones among us engage in the lively debate with each other on issues important to our lives. Perhaps one of the greatest tragedies of the Chinese culture occurred when Confucius (Kong Fuzi) skillfully ended the then budding tradition of a hundred schools of thoughts during the Warring State period. Who knows how many heads have bitten the dust for voicing their differences? 2. Crying and Whining Pardon me for taking this opportunity to say something about the saying of "crying babies getting more milk," thanks to Andy for bringing it to our attention. It seems to me that crying can be divided into two types: you can cry for a reason when you feel a profound discomfort, in Andy's words, when you feel downright "hurt, saddened and maddened" by the CBS report. In this case it is only natural that we protest, cry, and cry on top of our lungs. The reason that some of us are critical of Li Chenjian and others is that they seem to try to keep us quiet in the face of injustice. We can't do that, we'd rather cry. Of course there are those who love to cry for any reason or even no reason. Whining is a display of a weak individual's emotion and demeanor. So according to this definition, Li Chenjian has a point that we must treat ourselves as adults because we have the highest possible education Planet Earth could offer, and we must let the world know that. And we have the benefit of experiencing two radically different cultures. We have no reason not to be reasonable no matter what adversary stares us in the eye. In short, we should never allow us to be crying-babies. On the other hand, to appeal to reason does not equate to being silent and pondering in a dark corner about the merits of events happening right under our noses. Lu Xun and others had made the wake-up call many years ago. "Silence conduces nothing but death," if you will. In other words, our being reasonable does not make others reason with us. We must learn to face reality and be ready to voice our feelings. Sometimes we have to fight, and if necessary, fight their fight and walk their walk. Are we prepared, if you don't mind my asking? 3. Our New Living Environment I always feel that we have been thrown to the wolves since the day we left our motherland. Remember how weak we Chinese once were: even troops from the tiny Belgium armed with gunpowder weaponry had once kicked our collective rear end. Or our grandparents'. But what's the difference? Foreign bullies held great parties in our own backyards, by exploiting Chinese children, murdering Chinamen and raping Chinese women. It was wild. What did we do? Well, maybe Zhang Yimou's Red Sorghum preserves some scenes for you and me: we knelt down on all fours, begged for mercy but still were killed, skinned actually, if you paid attention. We were weak like mud, it's well documented whether you and I like it or not. We know that those who were sold to America, the land of freedom, had suffered a great deal for coming from a weak country. Time may have changed but we are not out of the woods yet. This is precisely the reason we must re-examine our new living environment and decide what mentality we should put on because sooner or later some one will step on our toes. Sure I know that reality is not that grim. But I for one can not help feeling the invisible bag on my back. That monster haunts my dreams even though I have been away from the Yellow Earth Plateau for many years. I often dreamed my having a hunched back facing the ground, pathetic and pitiful. This is the reason that, when I am awake, I don't feel surprised to see that certain people of Chinese descent want to disassociate from being Chinese. It hardly made my eyes blink when I heard Connie Chung the beautiful wants to distinguish herself from the rest of us. Who wants to carry that nightmarish bag, that sticky shadow of wetness and bloodiness? The reason we do is because we can't escape that thing. 4. MFN and Nancy Pelosi So you caught me rambling. I might as well bring the MFN issue into this pot of stew, for in some sense the CBS mess and the MFN issue are interconnected. Both of them beg the question: who wants China to be strong and prosperous and the Chinese people to be respected? A stronger China will bring to all of us the children of the Yellow Emperor respect even from, as phrased by Kan Liao, "crabs, shrimps and turtles." The irony is that the "crabs, shrimps and turtles" mixed among us will be first to claim the glory, which I don't really mind. But there are people who resent the notion that China, the punching bag of the previous century, would become strong one day. Their resentment comes from fear. Oh yes, they are scared, panicking, contemplating with the notion that we might do them the same that CBS did to us, etc., etc.. So tell me, fellows, is it legitimate for me to ask those of you who work there at the IFCSS: Do you really think that Nancy Pelosi and others of her kind really respect China and us "ordinary Chinese" as phrased by the lovely Connie Chung? Let me know if you think I am simply a sour grape. I told you I would like to be positive and to offer constructive criticism only. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. Please Calm Down! -- Thoughts on CBS Issue..............Youming Wei 68 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please calm down, man! Don't be so naive and stupid on the CBS Spy Issue! Learn to use strategy. Don't just fight for something and turn out to lose more. Simply fight for your idealism doesn't necessarily get you there faster/better. We need to know what we are doing and what we want to gain. What do you want to gain from the "fight"? An apology from CBS stating that only a handful of Chinese "ordinary" students and scholars are spies? Acknowledging that Chinese Minister of Security only inquires very few students before they go abroad? Make some loud noise on NBC and ABC that Chinese students and scholars think there are only very few spies among them? Of course, nobody can make an absolute statement saying that no Chinese spy has really "endangered" American interests. What can you gain from such a fight? It just makes it even worse. Don't you hate Chinese spies? Maybe you only hate those political spies who monitor the overseas Chinese community for political activities. You might not care about those spies working on economic/technological/militarial information. But Americans care more about the latter. The CBS report won't damage our job seeking in general, but it may affect some cases with some employers' mindsets. However, an apology from CBS will not improve anything on this aspect. Basically, the CBS report was blaming CCP for using ordinary citizens to spy on the US, possiblly resulting in some negative effects for ordinary Chinese citizens in US in terms of job opportunities. Let the media know that they cannot ignore the Chinese community and throw dirty words on them? Let Americans know that Chinese in America have become an organized/united group? Maybe this will be the only outcome of the fight. Would this really be beneficial to us Chinese, or would it only scare Americans more??? What? Lawsuit against CBS? Will that make everybody's job chance better? Fighting for democracy won't make us immune to the spy-hunt. Self- declaration of not being a spy is also meaningless. Some facts we can never deny: we came from a communist country with tight government control and had communist-educated childhood. Something always affects our thinking. Even when we organize the "fight," the "6.4" movement, we can't get rid of the communist "style" in many situations. Being angry at the CBS report, somebody attacked CBS/Connie Chung personally. Just can't see a healthy response, an effective way to handle it. In fact, letters to CBS showing concern about possible negative effects on the innocent Chinese students and urging them to carefully review such kinds of reports would be a correct approach. Don't flood their FAX machines. Don't make an impression that the Chinese groups are impolite, no manner, or out of control. Once you throw dirty words (being angry) on them, you yourself look very dirty too. Our image will be worse in Americans' eyes. This issue needs a low-profile approach rather than a mass movement. The latter won't work for you, no matter how eagerly you want to get there. One more question: do you want to protect CCP spies, or do you want to get them exposed? Think about this: what would this "fight" do for those real spies? Most western countries still treat PRC citizens as Communist country people, therefore being very restrictive on granting them entries. The restrictions in the US are among the loosest for PRC citizens in terms of entry visa. Don't be spoiled, just think U.S. should view us as non-communist-root people. Being in America, we need to understand American interests as well as our own. If in conflict, we must use skill, rather than just emotionally fight, fight, and fight. Don't make things worse, fighters! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. Shall We Join Force with Mexicans?........................Houpao Ma 44 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I was workingat home. The TV was left on as a reminder of my favorite comedy series -- otherwise why would anyone bother nowadays, anyway? Filled with commercialized enthusiasm and emotion (for nothing to be emotional about), the lady announcer's voice squeezed through the wall: "We'll take a GOOD look at the problem of illegal immigration RRRIGHT here on ABC..." OK, so this time she caught my attention. "...It's titled 'Go Back to Mexico!'" Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Immediately after I managed to get back my weak mind, I swore to Chairman Mao that I shalt never, ever watch tabloid TV news programs again. I mean, neverneverneverEVER, not like old George. The problem could be real -- it's not for me to judge. But how could a supposedly reputable major network news broadcaster use a title like that? If you think the CBS report on "potential Chinese spies" was outrageous, this one must be outright shameless. What's coming tomorrow? "Drop dead in the high seas, Chinamen"? So far, various minority groups in America have been fighting discrimination and the anti-immigration wave in their own, separate camps. In fact, mutual discrimination is not unusual among the groups. I'd go even further by saying that the Chinese community is probably one of the most discriminative ethic groups, especially against blacks and hispanics. Aren't we, all the minority groups, in the same boat struggling for survival facing the surging tide of anti-immigration sentiment and discrimination? Shall we begin the fight from within ourselves? Would it be possible for us to join our hands in this "battle"? I do not see a problem in the white majority, not personally at least. But I do see a serious problem in the growing trend in irresponsible tabloid TV news programming. The TV news empire has become so commercialized and semi-monopolized that it's literally creating news, rather than merely reporting. The possibility of joining force with Mexicans may not be as far-fetched as it may seem at first glance. The barrier is probably in our own minds. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. Some Thoughts to Share.....................................Kan Liao 57 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Where is Wando? Wando, the clownish teenage cartoon figure, often pops up on those unexpected occasions and places to do some good deeds. But if you really try to find him, good luck. I am not sure I spelled his name right. Anyway it is not my favorite cartoon. It is a piece of olds, not news, that a teenage citizen of the leading democracy in the world was sentenced to be flogged in the rear end in a foreign country for a misdeed he did there. This sentence has put those universal human-rights guardians into double red alert. A chorus of outcry was heard. The leading solo tenor was the president of that certain leading democracy in the world, the group contained human-rights watch for the continent in which the foreign country is located, Amnesty "the earth", lofty liberalized media commentators, universal human-rights fighters and democracy fighters. The list went on and on. They cried in good unison that it was a cruel and unusual punishment, violation of human rights, etc.. A few weeks later, the storm finally came to an end after the universal human rights was "violated." The earth is still turning at about 24 hours a revolution. The sun is still rising in the east, which means I still go to work in the morning. Now, another piece of news is breaking out in that "troubled" continent. What a treacherous place! This time a few plotters of that famous failed assassination attempt on the ex-president of that leading democracy are sentenced to death. I do not know how to categorize the death penalty. Well, no storm or outcry this time so far. I guess the chorus group is on vacation. I know that those assassins were not for political reasons (they were after the ex-president's real estate in Kennebunkport), their country was not bombed for their "blunder", and absolutely no international pressure was applied for their conviction. I know this is the triumph of good over evil, democracy over dictatorship, and universal human rights over deprivation of freedom. I guess the death penalty is soothing and usual, and death penalty for politically movtivated assassins are not categorized as political prisoners because there will be no prisoners left afterwards. Do not get me wrong here. In fact, I am for the death penalty for those guys. I just believe in a thing called consistency. Do not tell me those universal human-rights guardians are trully for human rights rather than the ugly and shameful political reasons. I just happen to believe that whoever breaks the law shall get punishment, no exception for those with so called "political reasons." That, I thought, ought to be the universal thing! Certainly, those guys are criminals. No doubt about that. Since the guardians like to apply their standard to everyone, I wonder what sentence an assassin will likely get in this leading democracy, let alone a failed one. I know for certain that the assassination of Chile's president was not related to CIA, the bombing of Kadafi by the leading democracy was not an assassination attempt (missiles are not home-made bombs), and the invasion of Panama was not illegal. Well, I think you will have a pretty good idea. I know that wrong political reasons do not count and do not render you that "political prisoner" status; only the right ones do. What are the right ones? The right ones are the ones which the leading democracy believes to be right. It is just a coincident. Where is Wando? I am waitiiiiiiiiiiiiing. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++ + Executive Editor: Bo Peng + + Asocciate Executive Editor: Ming Chen + + Executive Moderator: Changqing 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 + +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++