Not the North-Korea we have come to know?

Imperial. You. Do. Not. Speak. For. China.

You speak for yourself. And that's it.

Do not attempt to represent the viewpoints of other people.

Do not attempt to apologize on their behalf.

And the entirety of your response is one giant self-righteous fish for compliments. You cannot seriously expect to play the straight man when you are arguing that it's okay for people to be treated as garbage because 'it's their culture' or whatever other cockamamie reason you can concoct.

There's nothing worth taking from anything you've said. You don't bring up new issues or even new arguments. The answer to any criticism you come under is always a resounding 'bleh.' Either you abandon your arguments and label them as someone else's, you claim that there isn't any certainty to be found even when there very obviously is, or you bring out the tried and true 'cultural differences' card. Failing those, you simply attack the West and altogether forget about the issues at hand.

Some people fall for that nonsense. Others are just happy to join the bandwagon of anti-Americanism, no matter who they're sitting next to. That's fine. Their loss, their stupidity.

But I am just peeved to no end when you try and bring this self-righteous act out and claim to be the voice of reason and legitimacy. Even people who know better are guilted out of an argument by someone who has their authority or worldview being challenged. That's just unacceptable. There is a massive dissonance between the ideas you're trying to promulgate and the attitude you have about them. Pick a fucking stance already and stop with this halfway bullshit.

Neither do you speak for the West. If I am incapible of speaking for China, despite all that I know, you are incapible of representing anybody else as well.

The circular nature of the discussion is your doing, not mine. You continueously attack China with the same points and my answers simply do not change. Nor can you expect them to, since you refuse change.

From you. And apparently Pottman as well. Does not mean that YOU represent everybody's views.

If you are incapible of seeing my position despite all the posts that I have made stating them over and over again, that is not my flaw, it is yours. And I don't 'label them as someone else's', they were never mine to begin with. You simply could not see that, so I had to clearify them and where they originated from.

Again, the argument never changes on either side. It is a 'tried and true' "card" because it is a reasonable point. You simply cannot abide by the idea that others think differently than you.

Of course I do. 1. It is a ligitimate debating strategy. 2. It is a ligitimate point. How can you demade that from other for which you cannot do yourself? You can't. Its called hypocracy. I simply point it out.

No, you are blinded by your own 'brillience' and lose track of the points yourself. Do I stray sometimes? Yes, but I bring it back to the point and connect it, whether someone points it out before I do so, or I do it on my own.

No it is not. My argument states my position in reasonable terms. If others agree with it, it does not make it a 'fish for compliments'. You are simply object to the idea that my arguments are reasonable.

It also called 'agreeing with reason'. You are simply labeling it negatively.

1. I dislike America, but I moderate that dislike and it does not necessarily extend to hate.
2. There is nothing I can do about that. A skinhead might agree with your anti-Chinese ideas, but does that make you a skinhead?

Reread it. I was trying to seem reasonable and even trying to dispel the notion of self-righteousness. I was acknowleding my own human flaws.

Not quite sure what you are saying here.
What is unacceptable to you is your own standard.

No there is not. You simply cannot pick it out and realize what is my position and when I am stating what I think are the positions of others.

1. I am not required to obey you.
2. I do have a stance.
3. You contradict yourself by saying I have dissonance in my stance and that I have none.
4. If I choose to avoid some topics, that is my choice. I don't post on ALL of the threads of this forum, because in some cases I simply don't have a stance/ don't want to be drawn into a debate over it.

I choose to go into debates over China because I have a stake in them and a strong opinion that overrides the feeling that some others on this forum have to avoid confrontations with you.

@Imperial

I'm going to ignore the whole issue of misrepresentation, and just present a few points. I don't particularly like debating about China, as it seems a fairly pointless exercise, considering some of their wrongs are both blatantly obvious and unforgivable, and some issues are far too convoluted to pass judgement on. However, I'm going to put that aside a throw a little bait at you Imperial, if only under the context of bringing this back into the realm of political debate. However, I want your stance on these issues, not China's, and not a halfway answer, or anything in between. Once again, I have no interest in you and Kali's little spat over representation, I'm just legitimately curious about your stance. In the three months I spent in China, I found that people were less than excited to speak of their political beliefs, so I'd be interested to hear from someone far more connected to the culture and what not than I. I'm just going to toss out a few points.

First off, I'm going to sit here and dispute the illusion that people are relatively content with their government. Don't give me the speech about how they're not revolting, but here's my thing? Why is their a complete absence of everyday people turning their nose up at the government? No society exist where everyone is content, and more often then not, these people are pretty vocal. I'm not talking about the people who are brave enough to strike out and join one of these "democratic" parties, but rather people who just live a average, middle class life.

In my business workings there, me and my few companions made a good deal of friends and contacts, and the recurring theme was their unwillingness to to talk about their government or politics in general. For the sake of privacy, I'm not going to reveal names or companies, but a certain high level executive of one of the highest earning Chinese companies, has become a very good friend of mind. I've know him for two and half years now, and we talk at least every two weeks. I've met his wife and kids, he's met mine. We will talk about history, and Israeli politics at a whim. But now, back story aside, let me tell you the interesting part. Around a year ago, I finally got him to talk about the government.

Naturally, my first question was of his reluctance, so he told me why. He stated it simply: fear, or punishment of some kind. At his level of society, he told me the government will happily sanction you or tag you for some kind of negative business practice. All for speaking his mind. Is that happiness? No, that's fear. He also told me of the people below him, the workers. When one of them started a labor protest, he disappeared. Just like that. I laughed at first, seeing how cliche it was. But then I saw he was dead serious. I'm not going to lie, it's scary, I get the feeling that level of fear permeates throughout Chinese society. People like that aren't going to revolt, they're going to keep their mouth shut, if only for a little safety and peace. Do you support that? Is a government based on fear justifiable?

Ok, now the other point. Indoctrination, and how the Chinese government is influencing a whole new generation of lackeys. Me and you have discussed this before, and this just comes from a few books I bought on my trip there, and the shock and awe I experienced while reading them. I like to think I've read a lot of history books, and ones of all nations. When it comes to a timeline, every source I've read, seems to be in general agreement, with only minor differences, that are most likely confusion, rather than government intervention. However, reading this Chinese history book, that timeline went completely out the window. They have literally altered history, and built themselves up on a pedestal, that they have done nothing to earn. Every government has a certain level of indoctrination, even America, but China's is simply unrivaled.

Those are just a few of my issues with China, but they're pretty sweeping. It's really all part of me trying to figure out more about your stance. I know China's and I don't agree with it. But where do you stand? Take off the burden of the entire Chinese nation, and tell me your stance, which I'm far more interested in. It will make a far more interesting debate than you defending a nation that I don't even know where you stand on.

Note: You sliced up the points into paragraphs, so I'm just going to answer by the paragraphs, rather than line by line.

The belief that there are no people that protest against the government's doings and actually accomplish things and don't disappear in the middle of the night is simply not true. There are many disputes, partiularly over land, that cumulate in protests and riots. I've posted links to articles about this in the past. In China, there are literally hundreds of protests, each with thousands of people in them, every year over land and other problems. The government [not trying to say that they are good, or this negates anything, just reporting] is firing more and more provincial leaders for failing to keep the peace and making them look bad by not at least pacifying the people and for the most part, there haven't been military/armed incusions against these particular protests. Some have faded away on their own [the corruption of the local, government-appointed leaders having been the problem, mostly in charging higher land rents than the central government told them to], others have entered negotiations and some even reach settlements. But the mere fact that the protests occur make it obvious that the Chinese government is doing something wrong in their leadership and the people are angry.
In my opinion, part of the reason that you don't hear of it is, of course, the censorship. The other part is Western bias. If it looks like the central government is going to successfully reach a comprimise with the protestors, then suddenly the Western news sources stop reporting. Then I have to go to Chinese sources.

Are the people 100% behind the government? No, not in my mind. More like >25%, if that. My point about the lack of revolutionary riots was that they are not as upset as they are portrayed. The Chinese government has to earn their approval rating, in my opinion. The Chinese government is partly oppressive, partly one lucky **** of a ruling group. They make decisions and commit to some actions that just happen to be ones that the Chinese people understand and don't protest against. The government capitalizes on the way in which the people think. Take their Foreign Policy for example. In some respects, one could argue [and I do] that the people approve of it because they remain suspicious and distrusting of foreigners [on the whole]. The Policy benefits the members of the government, but may just conencide with the opinions of the people by coincidence. I believe that the doing is part deliberate [the higher ups who actually know what they are doing], part because the ruling class has a similar mindset to the majority of the people and part, but a significant portion of the Chinese government never even give the people of China's opinions a single thought. I would make it so that the people, no matter what they think, is the driving force behind all of the decisions made. Within reason, with solid reasoning, of course

About your friend/associate: That is something that I would change about the government. The fear I would want to get rid of; assure the people that nothing would go wrong if they protested. In my mind, part of the Chinese government's most fatal flaws is its inability to adapt. It NEEDS to adapt to the changing world. That just happens to include Freedom of Expression. Promote solidarity and keep arguments within the country, don't oppress people. There is no reason that the world needs to know China's internal struggles, but there is no reason NOT to hear out the people. I just take issue with people pushing China to do things faster than it wants to. If you introduced a Democracy tomorrow and collapsed the CCP, the Chinese people would, despite all the CCP's flaw, be pineing for them by the day's end. Democracy is simply a foreign concept to them, for the moment. Not how it works, but how to do it.

On indoctrination: I would get rid of some of it [partly, on the basis that I am not sure as to its extent]. The doctoring of the text books - gone. I HATE the texts that I have worked out of in the past [Western, no less], because they show clear bias. Even those teaching the courses told us and pointed out the bias. People tell me "Well, its published by a company in ____ for ____ [country], so obviously there would be bias." That is NO EXCUSE in my mind. History should be taught just like math or science. Do you see the math teachers teaching different math equations based on the country they are in? NO. So don't do it with the text books. Other things [sorry for the rant], like internet controls would be phased out gradually. Official sites without bias/misleading/false information [kind of like LexisNexis] would be created and the people directed there so they know where to get good, reliable information. The squashing of things like child pornagraphy and the like would continue, however. Though, in the case of anything going away, polls and fair votes would have to be called to determine whether they SHOULD be discontinued. Country propoganda [ads for joining the military or some such] would continue. As for the conscription... well, they don't really do that anymore anyways. Its mostly volenteers now.

Part of a China that I would idealize; YOU [as in you, Matt] wouldn't hear about the fiery debates in the halls of representatives or the doings within the government because the people of China would keep it within the borders. Not out of fear, for they would still be heard and indeed, have greater sway individually within the government than other countries' citizens do in their own, but rather that China will deal with its own problems and do so without the rest of the world knowing there was even an issue. That does NOT mean that China will isolate itself completely. If history has taught any lessons to China that it should retain, its that good ideas don't only come from within China. It would listen to the foreigners and consider the wisdom [ha, what do I know of wisdom] of their ideals, but expect that the foreigners will respect its decisions, whatever those are.
Democracy: In all probability, yes, but Chinese Democracy.
Capitalism: Ideally not.
Nationalism: High.
Imperialism: What is that?

But would you keep the flag?

Interesting. At least now, I have a less vague idea of what your stance is, rather than assuming your mostly in line with the Chinese government. Give me a bit to process all that.

Sure. Whats wrong witht the flag? Its not like there's a hammer and sickle on it. Its completely made in appeal to nationalism and national origins and based on national ideals. Same as any other flag.
Note: this goes to gov.cn
http://english.gov.cn/2005-08/16/content_23394.htm
While the 'under the leadership of the Communist Party of China' may or may not have to change, thats another matter.

Too much red, just like the rest of communism. Needs more variety. Spice that bitch up.

Come on man! Take a lesson from South Korea.



Gives off a certain feel ya'know?

If only North Korea had a flag like the Benin Empire. Nothing Communist about it at all. Just a "don't fuck with us or we'll cut off your head with a long pointy-thing" ideology.

Where is the red? It has little to do with economics and the picture made is just a country that keeps its Democratic-like process within itself. None of the social stuff is anything that any Democratic country has not and is not doing.

Be more descriptive, and I'll consider it. Like I said, the ideal is not so set in stone that it cannot be altered in some ways. "A plan never survives contact with the enemy." Just so, a social structure has to adapt. If you have a good idea that is not too broad or vague, I'm interested in hearing you out.

Um... you DO know that the cultural flow between the countries have always gone the other way, right? And Korean or not, it is still a foreign idea. That means that proposing it warrents significant debate and discussion. China would have alot of other things to do...

I was just pointing out the over all feel it gives off. Not advising you to go all "Chinese copy" on South Korea's Flag.

I'm missing something then.

Again with the cultural flow problem. It'd be like redigesting something to China. Unpleasent and pointless.

I think your humor unit is malfunctioning.

See, you do have a humor problem Imperial1917, it's great that I'm not alone on this issue.

Made in China. Of course the humor unit is calibrated to other things.

Well in that case...

@ Matt
Too much white and blue.

Which breaks down after two months, with no warranty.

That is why they are cheap. Buy another.

And for that matter, it seems that foreigners have problems not breaking their stuff. Tons of Made in China stuff that I have, I only have to replace every half year to year. My mechanical pencils for example, I only have to replace when I lose them.

Eh, I'm inclined to disagree. Looking at it from a purely aesthetic standpoint, red has been absolutely done to death on flags, especially red and gold. Not to mention the similar layout and designs. Now, if the Israeli flag was lacking the Star of David, I would be inclined to agree with you. However, it's really the star that makes it unique and cool.