From @UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:owner-china-nt@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU Thu Jun 16 02:06:34 1994 Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 23:07:54 EDT Reply-To: Bo Peng Sender: China-Net From: Bo Peng Subject: Chinese Community Forum (#9433) 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 15, 1994 (No. 9433) +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= 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 ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== -*- Japan And Whatnot -*- 1. On Submission of IFCSS Presidency Candidates..................EBCCF 35 -- China and Japan: Past And Present -- 2. Santa Akihito..............................................Min Yang 65 3. Japan's Revolving Door: Prime Minister Hata's Indecisiveness May Cost Him His Job..................Kangcong Zhang 109 -- Democracy, Stupid! -- 4. Should We Make Democracy A Goddess?...................Newton X. Liu 198 -- CBS Rocks'n Rolls -- 5. A Letter to Friends Who Are Angered by the CBS Report......Ray Wang 72 6. Believe Or Not............................................Jiao Tong 101 -- Letters to the Editor -- a. Past Or Present -- Where Do We Live And How Do We Live?....Kan Liao 25 ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== -- From The Editor -- We have received only two articles regarding the Japan issue, and a letter asking us to refrain from touching the topic. Judging from this aspect, apparently not many CSS think there is much to be said. Perhaps the Chinese tradition of forgiving those who inflicted pain on us in the past still runs deep in the CSS community. Or perhaps it was so painful that we would rather have it blanked out and pretend that it never happened. But then again, perhaps not. Articles regarding the CBS report are still coming. Reflecting upon a recent event related to the past, Newton X. Liu offered a thought-provoking article on democracy in China -- believe it or not, there are still thought-provoking things to be said about the topic. As we are preparing for the issue carrying campaign platforms of IFCSS presidency candidates, the guidelines for submissions are given in the first item of this issue. If you are planning for candidacy, please read it carefully; it is very brief, thus should not take much time from your busy schedule. If you are interested in only reading the issue, by all means, please also read it -- we would need you as jury in case we are accused of biased or unethical conduct. News about China's economy keeps coming in everyday; some report on exciting new developments or statistic figures, while others are on problems and potential dangers. The opinions on the future outlook of China's economy seem to be just as contradictious. Some are busy preparing for the celebration of China's becoming the most powerful economic power in the world. Others are urging their families in China to stock up and prepare for the doomsday. This is the theme we are planning to focus on soon. ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 1. On Submission of IFCSS Presidency Candidates..................EBCCF 35 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- As announced in the last issue, CCF is planning to carry a special issue on next Wednesday for IFCSS presidency candidates to publicize their campaign platforms. We think such an exposure is long overdue. Here are the guidelines regarding the submissions from the candidates. We hereby request kind coorperation from all the candidates to adhere to these guidelines. 1. It should not exceed 200 lines in length, including blank lines separating paragraphs. 2. Any types of information that the candidate deems appropriate may be included. However, we believe the readers would appreciate the platform more if the candidates could refrain from negative campaigning. 3. In order for us to distinguish the campaign messages from other contributions, please include a statement in the first paragraph explicitly stating that the message is for announcing candidacy. 4. The message should include statements identifying the local CSS organization the candidate is associated with, the campaign partner, and relevant past experiences. 5. Please send the submission to ccf-editor@ifcss.org by Tuesday, June 21. The order of appearance in the issue will be according to the length. Shorter (fewer lines) articles appear first. We appreciate your participation and coorperation. Wish you all success in your campaign. DISCLAIMER: The announcement of candidacy on CCF does not imply official establishment of candidacy in any way. Nor does failure to do so imply lack of intention. The Editorial Board will not do ANY editing or formatting on the submission, besides adding a title line when supplied in the subject line of the message. For your information, the normal line-width requirement for CCF is 76 characters. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Santa Akihito..............................................Min Yang 65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Santa Claus's coming to town," I murmured, in the office that was made chilly by the air-conditioning. "What?" Bob, my American colleague, gave me a bewildered glance. "Santa Claus' comin' to town," I repeated, only slightly louder. "You mean a weirdo store's launching a June-Xmas sale?" "Yup," I told this quick-minded Bob. "Only this Santa's got an odd name -- Akihito, which means Brightly Benevolent in Japanese, and his nick-name is Uneventfully Peaceful & Achieving Whatever His Majesty Wants to Achieve." "Heck! You mean this Japanese Emperor's coming to visit America -- He is no Santa, and he's even no fun!" "No, he's definitely no fun, but he is Santa Claus." "Why?" Bob followed up like a pleasant chat partner is supposed to. "First, Santa's always happy 'cause he's never done anything wrong. He is Hohohooh. Besides Almighty God, there's only the Japanese Emperor who never does anything wrong. But, think what a heinous crime you Americans committed using atomic bombs against the peace-loving Japanese people. Now the Japanese Emperor is coming to America with all the smiles to forgive you guys..." "Hold it a minute! Don't you know Pearl Harbor?" "Sure. A brilliant example of surprise attack in the military history, wasn't it? And His Majesty Achieved What He Wanted. Let me give you the second point on Akihito-is-Santa. Santa is generous. He is generous 'cause he's rich. A rich guy is generous and benevolent. A generous, benevolent and rich guy owes nobody nothin'. He's just offering hearty hohohoohs and sweets. He wants nothin' but to forgive all your sins and to make you happy..." "Stop there, will you," Bob apparently became a little annoyed, "Did you say the Japanese Emperor comes here to forgive OUR SINS?" "Yes. Yours and ours. Everybody in this world knows Hiroshima and Nagasaki - your Americans' sin. Every kid in the Japanese school knows the Chinese and other Asians stupidly stopped the Emperor's forces to "enter" China and other places to "liberate" the fellow Mongoloid race from the Western barbarians' colonial rule. That was our Asians' sin, but the Japanese Emperor already visited China and most kindly forgave the poor Chinese. The Chinese leadership, on behalf of all the Chinese people, of course, expressed heart-felt gratitude to His Majesty. Now Santa Akihito expects only one thing: the permanent seat for Japan in the UN Security Council. It's perfect and high time a Santa seated there." "Japan to be a veto power in the UN Security Council? This Akihito comes for this seat?" Apparently it has gotten a little over the head for poor Bobby. "Yup. This world has undergone a hectic change, as even every bozo knows. But so many old folks are still living in the past, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the D-Day! And, that has nothing to do with Japan! Japan produced no Hitler, no Holocaust, no Rape of Nanking, did nothing wrong in the past except being the victim of the A-bombs! Now the Japanese is in charge of peace-making in Cambodia, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and whathaveyou. Heck, it's high time JAPAN SAID NO TO THE WORLD!" "Are you a Japanese? I thought..." "You're darn right -- I'm a Shintoist, fundamentally." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Japan's Revolving Door: Prime Minister Hata's Indecisiveness May Cost Him His Job.................Kangcong Zhang 109 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Recent Japanese administrations have been known for their short life span. Since the 1989 general election, in which the ruling Liberal Democratic Party scored its first loss in 35 years, Japan has seen three prime ministers come and go. First, it was Toshiki Kaifu, who was elected prime minister by Parliament in August of 1989 despite his party's loss in the election one month earlier. But, lacking support from coalition partners in his effort to seek a more prominent role for Japan in the post-Cold War international community, Kaifu had to leave the office only 27 months into his 6-year term. Kaifu's successor, Kiichi Miyazawa, who had been criticized since day one in office for appointing a Cabinet of veteran politicians with past links to bribery and scandal, faired even worse. He was forced out of office by a no- confidence vote. Length of his stay in office: three-month shy of Kaifu's tenure. When Morihiro Hosokawa came to replace Miyazawa, he vowed to run a clean government. But that is easier said than done, especially in Japan, where corruption has brought down more high-ranking officials than in any other democratic country. Hosokawa proved not immune to Japan's bribery-infested political culture -- he resigned after he was linked to a financial scandal. He was in office for eight months. The man currently trying his best to navigate his prime-ministership through Japan's treacherous waters of politics knows he can use every bit of help he can find. Deprived of a majority in Parliament by a major former coalition partner's walking away even before a Cabinet was named, Tsutomu Hata has his work cut out for him. But help does not always come when it is most needed. Hata certainly did not get help from Shigeto Nagano, his justice minister, when the latter opened his big mouth calling the "Rape of Nanking" and Japan's other wrongdoing in World War II hoaxes. When historians all over the world have published scholarly works totaling the victims of the Nanking -- which has been called Nanjing since the Communists took power in 1949 -- massacres to as many as 300,000, no one could claim in good conscience that such human tragedies are fabrications for propaganda purposes. Neighboring Asian countries that fell victim to Japanese aggression in World War II are outraged, and rightly so, at Nagano's blatantly irresponsible remarks. China, South Korea, North Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam all conveyed their shock and outrage to the Japanese government through diplomatic channels. Protesters in South Korea demanded that the Hata administration punish Nagano and apologize for the incident. Pressure on Hata to act also comes within Japan. Leaders from both Hata's coalition partners and the opposition have demanded Nagano to resign. But, operating on his instinctive desire to avoid firing a Cabinet minister less than 10 days in office, Hata was reluctant to take any action. Such reluctance to take decisive measures when decisive measures are called for will prove more harmful down the road that Hata realized. In the days to come, the opposition is not likely to remember that Hata called Nagano's remarks "regrettable." Instead, what is going to come back and haunt the Hata administration is Hata's support for Nagano, who resigned in red eyes after apologizing for hurting the feelings of the peoples of neighboring Asian nations. At home, Hata's indecision in critical times speaks unfavorably to his leadership. On this account, the opposition has pledged to attack his administration in Parliament. Abroad, Hata is going to have a hard time winning back Japan's neighbors' confidence in his government. Now that Hata has revealed his attitude toward a sensitive issue, Japan's neighbors will be all the more watchful for any sign of resurfacing Japanese jingoism. They will no longer be satisfied with mere verbal assurance that Japanese military aggression is long past history, because they now know for sure that Japanese jingoism dies hard if it ever dies. That Nagano is a 71-year-old veteran of the Japanese Imperial Army and arguably belongs to the older generation does not diminish the significance of his offensive remarks. In the wake of the Nagano incident, more and more people will be alerted by the fact that the views explicitly expressed by Nagano are shared by many more Japanese jingoists, only the latter are smart enough not to burst themselves into public humiliation. Now, that is something good coming out of this public outrage. But outrage is a terrible price to pay for anything. And the public can only be outraged so many times before its outrage loses the magic charm. Therefore, it is imperative that the world find a more effective way to stem back Japanese jingoism, and for that matter, militarism of any nation. That will not be easy. For many years now, Japan's neighboring nations that suffered under Japanese aggression in World War II have demanded that the Japanese government apologize to them, but so far, nothing close to official apology has materialized. Ironically, when Hosokawa in his first news conference as prime minister called World War II "a war of aggression" and said it was wrong, he was ridiculed by Japan's conservative legislators. But then, the task does not have to be a daunting one, either. In fact, if the Hata administration is willing to salvage its tainted reputation by acting decisively in the aftermath of the controversy, the task may indeed be quite accomplishable. As a first step, Hata should denounce in strong language Japan's role in World War II, and push for an official apology by the Japanese government to the victim nations of Japan's past aggression. To replace Nagano, Hata has just named Hiroshi Nakai, who is a full generation younger and is believed to embrace different views on Japan's past aggression than his predecessor. That is a good sign. But not to raise unrealistic expectations, even if Hata does elect to do the right thing, it may be years before a final solution is found. In the process, Hata is certainly to meet tremendous challenges from both his coalition partners and the opposition, and he may even lose his job as prime minister. The question is: Does Hata think doing the right thing, even at the risk of being branded head of one more short-lived Japanese administration, is more important than the other way around? (Originally appeared in The Badger Herald, UW-Madison, May 11, 1994. Forwarded by author.) ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 4. Should We Make Democracy A Goddess?...................Newton X. Liu 198 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Relax, fellows, I make no attempt whatsoever here to attack those of you who have contributed in building and erecting the statue. As a matter of fact, if you have read any of my writing, you know that I strongly favor freedom of speech and encourage every one to speak his/he mind and express oneself in whatever way one feels comfortable, be it carving a statue or starting a hunger strike or saying nothing at all. One thing which does annoy me to hell is that you guys and gals invited Nancy Pelosi and others of her kind. Do you really need her blessings? But that's also your business. Who knows who is using whom? However, it's my business and I intend to make it my business here to probe into the concept of democracy. I thank the CCF for providing such a forum. I was in China between late May and early August in 1989 but did not participate in the demonstration. I was not hot enough. Or maybe I was too old and it was not easy for my blood to get going, though the weather at the times was so unbearable that I thought I was going to explode. Of course I was deeply concerned about what went on on the streets and far away in the city of Beijing. My heart went out to those young brothers and sisters out there beating their chests and waving their headbands. I was worried so much that I must have a peculiar facial expression because everywhere I went people stared at me with great curiosity and intensity. Once traveling by train, every one of the one hundred or so people in the whole car came to gather around me. They thought I was one of the students, an insider, coming back from the Square. Seeing all the faces in different shapes and sizes, there was a tremendous amount of respect; I was overwhelmed by the unspoken emotion which was electrifying along the train's noisy and steady march forward. I was at somewhat a loss. When an old man with his shirt unbuttoned handed you his mug of water which he had protected for more than half of the day (with ants and other stuff moving at the bottom) and when an old lady fought the crowd just to give you a cucumber, what would you say to those ordinary folks in a crowded hardseat car? What were the college kids doing in the streets and on the Square? What are they asking for? So what is democracy? They asked me. I stumbled badly over the last question. I did not know. Democracy was such a fuzzy idea in my mind, an implant, so foreign and so decorated. I could feel the myth building around the concept that day, and my frustration was that I was unable to penetrate the myth. I could not explain clearly to my folks what democracy was because I did not want to invent nor to deceive. That question made me nervous because I wasn't sure whether those young brothers and sisters out there were any clearer than I was. No. you can't tell me that since they were fighting for it, they must have known. I tried to tell them that I was not a student but my refusal only made them believe otherwise. I had no pretension to show that I knew more than they did. So I only expressed my concern that the young brothers and sisters might or might not understand the concept they were fighting for. That was the best lesson I learned during the summer of 1989: honesty can win one a lot of friends. Several young men, let's say they had an incredible of machismo in their manners, volunteered to carry my bag off the train and made sure that I would find my way home without being arrested or something. That was the time when wrinkles developed on my forehead with unbelievable speed. It was a time of ages. Today, I still can't claim that I have fully comprehended the concept of democracy. Maybe I'm slow. I am baffled: if we accept the assumption that our generation and the younger ones to come are not particularly religious, what had turned some of us worshippers of the religion of democracy? Am I missing something here? I have conducted some research on the myth of democracy. Sure, you can call me a nerd if you choose to be cruel. I 'm slow because I'm still entangled with the basic definitions of the concept. My research hasn't produced anything significant. Not yet. But with your permission I do have a couple of quotes to share with you. I am sorry to say that neither of my authors is one of the founding fathers of the United States of America. Hope you are not disappointed. Maybe some of you have heard Salman Rashdie, the author who gained his fame for writing the novel Satanic Verses whose blatant blasphemy of the Islamic Fundamentalism has earned him the death condemnation handed out by the late Iranian spiritual leader Kuomeini. Rashdie also has another novel entitled SHAME which contains the following nonfiction passage: "Autocratic regimes find it useful to espouse the rhetoric of faith, because people respect that language, are reluctant to oppose it. This is how religions shore up dictators; by encircling them with words of power, words which the people are reluctant to see discredited, disenfranchised, mocked. But the ramming-down-the-throat point stands. In the end you get sick of it, you lose faith in the faith, if not qua faith then certainly as the basis for a state. And then the dictator falls, and it is discovered that he has brought God down with him, that the justifying myth of the nation has been unmade. This leaves only two options: disintegration, or a new dictatorship ... no, there is a third, and I shall not be so pessimistic as to deny its possibility. The third option is the substitution of a new myth for the old one. Here are three such myths, all available from stock at short notice: liberty; equality; fraternity. I recommend them highly." (p.278) This paragraph keeps lingering in my mind for days after I read the book. I can't help noticing the fact that both Rashdie as a Middle-Easterner and we as Chinese are dealing with societies which are already dominated by an ideology, be it communism or Islamic Fundamentalism. I was amazed to see that Rashdie made "liberty; equality; fraternity" equal to Islamic Fundamentalism. Now I have passed my initial stage of amazement. What surprises me is that in real life some of the wholesalers of democracy are actually making democracy another myth, another religion right under our noses. Worse yet, they are trying to transplant their undigested concept to China, the motherland of a greater many. Perhaps I should wish them success but I know better. And I hope that all of us know that common folks, ones who drink from the mug with ants and other stuff at the bottom, are not easy to be manipulated. Even if they are, we as their children have the duty to make sure that such a manipulation won't take place within our eyesight. I for one know too well how much common folks have for centuries suffered from others' smart ideas. If we want to do something for them and for us all, we should make it damn sure that we know what we are doing. We must do the right thing. We can't afford to buy a particular product simply because you have just seen a great commercial on TV. We came from such a deep poverty, both economically and psychologically, that we can't fool around for yet another generation then embark on yet another journey of recovery. I read "Technology and Democracy" (originally a lecture) by Daniel J. Boorstin some years back when I was a Graduate Student Instructor teaching a rhetoric class. "[The U.S.] has been a place of renewal, of new beginnings for nations and for men. Vagueness has been a national resource: the vagueness of the continent, the mystery of resources, the vagueness of social classes, the misty miasma of our hopes. Our society has been most distinctively a way of reaching for rather than of finding. American democracy, properly speaking, has been a process and not a product, a quest and not a discovery. But a great danger which has been nourished by our success in technology has been the belief in solutions. For technological problems there are solutions. ... In human history in the long run there are no solutions, only problems." (The Dolphin Reader, ed. by Douglas Hunt. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1986. P. 164) Boorstin has a unique argument here because he was the first person I had ever read to point out that democracy, the Holy Grail of many, is at its best a process not a solution. It is obviously against conventional wisdom to say so; yet if you read Boorstin's essay, you find a well thought-out argument with great eloquence. Let me simply ask: How many of you out there have thought or are still thinking that democracy is the solution or the only solution to our problems back in China? Have you ever thought that democracy may be a misfit to the Chinese situation? If we are going to turn our nation upside down (I do see the necessity from time to time), we must know what we are going to build on the ruins. You can't simply tell me that you will plant something of which you only understand some parts but not the whole. Parts of it fit us very well, you may say. But I don't think parts is good enough. We are not short of emotions. We have seen blood and witnessed the falling of live bodies. We have seen and shed tears and listened to weeping for many, many years. Our feelings are strong. Because of this, we need some prudence. Sure all of us were eighteen years old once but no more. We've got to be mature enough to carry what history has been bestowed on our shoulders. If I may, I'd still like to offer the words of wisdom from the same Daniel J. Boorstin, who warns us with prudence: "Only by realizing the boundaries that we have been given can we discover how to reach beyond them. Only so can we have the wisdom not to mistake passing fads for great movements, not to mistake the fanaticism of a few for the deep beliefs of the many, not to mistake fashion for revolution." (Ibid. p. 165) In short, we must utilize our brain cells. We must think and reflect with great deliberation if we want to achieve greatness and make solid contributions. It will bother me the most if any of you out there claim that you are democracy fighters but actually know almost nothing about democracy except the word and the possible glory coming with it. I hated the most in China were those Party members who know nothing about communism except the fact that their membership would bring them power and privilege. I am also aware that sooner or later someone will jump up accusing me of being an academic. So I must tell you that I understand that a democracy fighter does not have to know everything about democracy. A good soldier is one who obeys and carries his order out well, right? History tells us that there are plenty of people who used a variety of flags to start revolutions. Some are successful, some are not. Don't you assume that I don't know how to just have one eye open. The one benefit of living here is that I don't have to avoid anything such as eye contact. If you are wrong, I will look into your eyes and tell you so. Be sure you do the same if I am wrong. In order to completely avoid answering the question I raised in the title of this article, let me close everything by citing a stanza of Yang Lian's poem, "About the Sun": A restless child on the beach keeps nagging her mother Insisting to tie the daytime with the ribbon of her hat She chooses you like picking out her favorite candy That tender heart does not like darkness Perhaps this is a child's logic -- if I don't want it, it won't come! ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== 5. A Letter to Friends Who Are Angered by the CBS Report......Ray Wang 72 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm highly appreciative of Mr. Mi Mi's efforts in coordinating a committee to fight injustices exemplified by the recent attack on us by CBS. It is high time we as a united group stood up for our rights, especially when stakes are so low -- all it takes is probably a few moments of our time to make a statement or to voice our protest or suggestions. As well expected, we have heard different voices. Some are more radical than others, ranging from suing CBS to boycotting CBS. Some are introspective, represented by Mr/Ms Chenjian Li and seemingly transcending the actual incident into the realm of reason. I'm however no less bothered by this kind of attitude than by the CBS report itself. Yes, Chinese communities, our country and we students and scholars may have our own imperfections and even problems. But beating one's brain to rationalize the CBS report by belittling us even further (such as citing those so-called TOEFL and GRE scams) is simply heart-breaking. I can't help asking Mr/Ms Li and his/her like: "What are you suggesting us to do -- sending CBS a thank-you note for slapping our collective face?" Motivations aside, as I pointed out in my letter to Connie Chung and CBS, the report can hardly be regarded as serious journalism. It was based on one opinion from one book and one arrest (not even a conviction!). It's out-and- out tabloid sensationalization, of which we -- the whole Chinese community -- are the targets of defamation. Many friends have already pointed out that CBS would not even entertain the idea of implicating any other ethnic groups this way. They would have another riot on hand, if any other major groups were ever slightly provoked. Therefore, CBS chose an easy target, because they knew we have many Mr/Ms Li's, who would try to "understand" their position or even try to rationalize it to help silence the victims. I hate to sound paranoid, because I am not. Most, if not all, of my colleagues in my university stood behind me when I told them the CBS report. In fact, I knew, a few years back when Iranian students were literally under threat by certain elements here because of the US hostage situation, many, many Americans offered to have Iranian students stay with them for fear of possible retaliation. But it does not mean that a seed of distrust would not be planted somewhere by this CBS report. Many ethnic defamation of any proportion start small. A pastor in Germany said in the late 40's: "When they (Nazis) came for Communists, I didn't speak up because I was not a Communist; when they came for trade unionists, I didn't speak up because I was not a trade unionist; when they came for Jews, I didn't speak up because I was not Jewish; when they came for Catholics, I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. But when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up." Chinese history is rife with similar examples of tragedies. After all, isn't it our motto that one shall "sweep clean your own front yard and never mind what is on your neighbor's roof?" I bet this recent attack by CBS is directly related to our insensitivity to the continued distortion of Chinese image, such as portrayed by illegal immigration and other aspects. I am particularly encouraged by the fact there are people like Mr. Mi Mi who are willing to take the time and energy off to help fight injustices. Friends, it is the time to act, now. We could act as a group and also individually. For instance, immediately after the incident, I called CBS Evening News and voiced my indignation. Then, I did the following: 1. Wrote to IFCSS HQ by way of advice and suggestions on the incident; 2. Sent a fax to Connie Chung to express my protest; 3. Called our Congressman's local office to report the incident and sent the office a transcript of the report; 4. Called Mr. Liang Er, an IFCSS Councilor, who is interested in coordinating some organized protest. If each one of us could do some of what I or other friends have done, I am sure that our voice will come through loud and clear! In closing, I would like to salute to people like Mr. Mi Mi for their efforts, and to urge Mr./Ms. Li's to join our efforts in making a positive statement about our image. After all, even Jesus only suggested to "give your right cheek after your left cheek is slapped," NOT to slap your own face! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. Believe Or Not............................................Jiao Tong 101 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Many articles already made good comments on CBS report about Chinese spies, I won't repeat them. Here I talk about the comment by Mr. Wei Zhang on CCF issue 9428 regarding Mr. Chenjian Li's article on CCF issue 9426. Referring to the story of Mr. X that Mr. Chenjian Li wrote, Mr Wei Zhang exclaimed: "Such kind of reasoning completely does not follow!!!!!" However, I don't see how Mr. Zhang followed his own reasoning: Mr. Zhang said: "(1) you don't really know if your friend's story is true or not." Well, you don't know either, Mr. Zhang. No point here. "(2) can you really infer there is a spy network in US ..., even suppose the story is true?" By the same reasoning, can you really infer there is NO spy network in US, even suppose the story is NOT true? Again, no point at all. "(3) even there is such a net, do you think it involves many of ordinary CSS in US?" It doesn't take much time to reread Mr. Li's article. The original words from Mr. Li is: "I just want to say that it is true that there is a fairly organized attempt on the part of the Chinese government to organize spies in US." Is it clear? Mr. Li believed and used the story as an example of "attempt on the part of the Chinese government". True or false, it doesn't mean anything else. If you don't believe it, simply say: "I don't believe." No one could force you to. If you has story from another side, tell the readers, and let everyone draw his/her own conclusion. If you can't supply new information, better stop. Myself believe the story because I already knew a similar story. For those who believe such kind of stories, I would like share it with you. Actually, my story has more to do with "to believe or not to believe". Back in China, when I and some of my friends were in the painful process of applying for passport, a friend, let me call A, was summoned by the officials of National Security Bureau (Guo2 An1 Ju2). The conversation was very similar as those in the story of Mr. X. In the same way, A was upset and worried about the passport. A also used similar way to deal with Guo2 An1 Ju2 as Mr. X did. A told me: "I will say whatever they want me to say in order to get the passport. Once I leave this country, trash them (Qu4 Ta1 Ma1 De)." Two or three weeks later, another friend, B, had a more dramatic experience. B was informed by the boss that some "leaders" (ling3 Dao3) from the City Government wanted to talk to B. The "ling3 Dao3" were two mid-aged men. They talked to B friendly, asked B's future plan of study, living and even marriage in USA. B asked: "Are you from Gong1 An1 Ju2 (Public Security Bureau)?" They said: "No. We are from Shi4 Zheng4 Fu3 Er4 Ban4 (The No.2 Office of the City Government)." They politely asked: "If there are chances, would you do some work for our country?" B said: "I don't even know if I can go to the US, I haven't got my passport yet." They said: "Don't worry, we will talk to Gong1 An1 Ju2 and let them give you passport as soon as possible (Jin4 Kuai4)." In the evening, B told me in detail this "strange" thing and asked my opinion. I laughed at B: "You idiot! Don't you know they are of Guo2 An1 Ju2? They want you to be a spy!" B was a good product of the education system of CCP, and had no idea of what the "country machine" is all about. B argued: "No! They said they are from Shi4 Zheng4 Fu3 Er4 Ban4, not what you call Guo2 An1 Ju2." "OK." I joked, "Go to the City Government and ask where the No.2 Office is." B believed stuff like spying should be top "state secret" and couldn't be talked in this way:"How could you tell?" I had to tell B what happened to A just a few weeks before. To avoid causing more trouble for A, I didn't tell B who A was. B began to believe my words and became curious who A really is. Finally B figured out:"It must be C (another friend of mine)!" since C's major has something to do with "information." I just didn't want B guess again:"No comment." Then B raised another question: "Why us? Why not you?" I laughed again. "Very simple," I said, "I have no honor to do 'something' for our country." I am from a "Hei1 Wu3 Lei4" (Black Five Type) family. Both of my parents were labeled by CCP as enemies back in 1957. "How can Guo2 An1 Ju2 trust me?" (By the way, those who don't believe such kind of stories probably don't understand what "bad class origin" (Chu1 Shen1 Bu4 Hao3) really means either.) I didn't think B got it. Otherwise B might have called to mind that C is also from an "untrustworthy" family. Two such stories in a short time period didn't surprised me much. As many other articles said, every major country has huge spy business. What really impressed me was the way Guo2 An1 Ju2 handled the conversation and the way they chose candidates. In my opinion, neither A nor B is of the material for the spy business. The only reason I could came out was still the issue of "trustworthiness". The friend A was a CCP member, and A self believed that it was the main reason to be summoned. B wasn't a CCP member, but both of B's parents were. Indeed I was glad I had no problem with this spy business. During my life in China, the "bad class origin" things blocked my way many times. Ironically, it kept me away from the last trouble before I left. Sometime afterwards, friend A, B, C and I all came to the USA. One or two year later, friend C had a chance visiting me. We talked a lot. C told me that Zhong1 Guo2 Ming2 Lian2 was active on C's campus. There were often lectures or seminars organized by Ming2 Lian2. One day, a Chinese scholar "well-intentionedly" (hao3 Xing1) warned C: "Don't go to those counter- revolutionary activities. Some CSS on campus are working for Guo2 An1 Bu4 (National Security Department), they will report you. That will do you no good! (Dui4 Ni3 Mei2 Hao4 Chu4! )" C was very angry: "Even in here we still feel the shadow of CCP!" But he added, "I don't really believe any one on campus is working for Guo2 An1 Bu4." This time I was in no mood to laugh. "Are you kidding?" I said, "I can't be so sure." It's first time I told C the stories of A and B. As before, I didn't spell out the names of A and B, neither told C that B actually mistook C as A. Well, "believe or not", this is my story. I haven't met A or B in person since we came here. I wish all my friends happy and live in peace. I don't want hear that their stories have new chapters when I meet them someday. I truly hope that this is the end of the story. ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== Letters to the Editor ===========***==========***==========**==========***==========***=========== a. Past Or Present -- Where Do We Live and How Do We Live?....Kan Liao 25 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear editor: Sino-Japanese relation has been a very complicated one since our two nations started to contact more than a millennium ago. The crime of Japan committed in WWII is still fresh in our memory. The question of how we live with this historical burden is in our mind whenever we think about it. It is too difficult to formulate one solution once and for all. Each of us has to find his or her own way. Through Romeo and Juliet, William Shakespeare showed us how heavy a 'historical burden' can be. For Romeo and Juliet, the burden on them was beyond their bearing. By shwoing the world their tragic life, our beloved Billy pointed a way for us. Drama is not life itself. Meanwhile, our human nature, emotion and the reality often point the other way. We human are a mixture of emotion and rationality. Robotic rationality often fails in real life, whereas blind emotions usually hurt us more. That is wonderful life. Several years ago, I had a fairly unusual experience. A visiting Japanese scholar came to our lab. His family is from Hiroshima. He worked with an postdoc who is from Los Alamos. The best way we found was not to mention all those WWII stuff. We did not forget, yet we kept it quiet. We kept it this way without hurting someone's feeling, nor arousing someone's sense of guilt. We had to put present first. I know it is easy for us to act this way because the past events did not affect us directly. I don't know if it was the best way. For something the exploration itself is often more damaging. Kan Liao ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Editor's Reply ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Kan, We very much appreciate your concern and continuous participation. However, I do not quite understand what you meant when you implied that exploration of the Japan issue is "damaging." To the feelings of the Chinese or Japanese people? To the mutual goodwill between the two peoples? Or to the cozy relation between the two governments? I do not think that CCF has the capability to exert any influence on the last aspect mentioned above. As to the first two, I believe open expression and exchange of opinions would help healing the wounds and enhancing mutual understanding. I only regret that no Japanese readers (if there is any) offered their opinions on this issue, which would have provided us a perspective that many of our readers are not familiar with. Sincerely Bo Peng Executive Editor of the current issue of CCF +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++ + Executive Editor: Bo Peng + + Asocciate Executive Editor: Ming Cheng + + Executive Moderator: Weihe Guan + +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + 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 + +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=++