I love it when China-bashers get so wound up, as this case here.

It's a fact that China has been colonized by Western powers a little over 100 years ago. It was humiliating and still is. Blacks will never forget about their period as slaves, Jews will never forget about their history with germany, so why should Chinese white wash its own history of humiliation? So that they can avoid being call a fenqing or whatever by haters on the internet? LOL. Heck if the nationalist Tibetans bitch about China's "cultural genocide" though Tibet the region has gained substantially from Chinese central government in the last decade, why can't Chinese complain about foreign powers insisting on influencing China?

They were half-colonized--as Sun Yat-Sen noted. Grouping China in with African and the Southern and South-East asian nations who were actually colonized is part of China's black-washing of its history. A "century of humiliation" is part of the black-wash, which you would recognize were you not stuck on nursing grievances you haven't personally suffered. And by attempting to tie yourself to the Jewish experience in the Germany, which you clearly don't understand, and the black experience in the US and Brazil, which you are further in ignorance about, you simply make yourself look like a wannabe aggrieved, an emotional parasite living off of the suffering of others for your own sustenance. The Chinese nation essentially dresses itself in blackface and dances for the world, backed by "Darlee" toothpaste sponsership. It is a humiliating dance on it finds entertaining. The rest of the world just cringes at China's ignorance.

Apart from a brief period with Japan, foreign rule/control did not extend over the Chinese populace, rather it provided an exception to Chinese rule over foreign residents. Shanghai was such a zone. Some of Shandong was such a zone. Hong Kong did not exist before the British. The primary aspect of China's long history of "humiliation" then and now was China's recognition of its backwardness under the Qing, particularly in how the Qing treated its own people. The hatred of foreigners that developed in China was merely an appendage to that, and one grafted onto a long tradition of wounded arrogance and xenophobia nursed by the institution of imperial rule.

For killing 10s of thousands of foreigners and native chinese sympathetic to foreigners, China's symbols of imperial power and domination were smashed. With the exception of Japan, there were no campaigns against the Chinese people directly. Hardly the same type of suffering endured by the Indians or South African natives. The US actually used the Boxer indemnity to build China's best university, to the great benefit of the Chinese people today. You are humiliated because one cannot look back Chinese history without recognizing how backwards the Chinese people are in the world, even today--they have not freed themselves from their own imperialism; they willingly are used as tools for the autocratic power which does not need their opinions to govern them.

You state:

"LOL. Heck if the nationalist Tibetans bitch about China's "cultural genocide" though Tibet the region has gained substantially from Chinese central government in the last decade, why can't Chinese complain about foreign powers insisting on influencing China?"

I suggest you read a book published in the PRC: it is entitled "Shua Congming de Zhongguo Ren" ("Chinese People Flourishing their Cleverness". It is written by a Chinese and recognizes the frequency of the Chinese attempting to look "clever" by doing or saying something they've only half thought-through. The book in fact argues that all 1.3 billion Chinese think they are "clever". It accurately notes that such false cleverness only make people look foolish in the process of displaying it, unable to sense irony and difference, and desperately needy for confirmation on top of all of that.

Indeed, if you are currently committing the total and surely "benificent colonization" of Tibet, one wonders why you'd bother complaining about foreign powers half-colonizing China in the past, or about foreigners unjustifiably writing articles with (breathe deep!) A NEGATIVE view of China today. Just another whiner who wants to look clever, I guess. Fenqing through and through. Save the accusations of "China-bashing" and bigotry for someone who cares.

Should be: "It is a humiliating dance only [China] finds entertaining."

Israel and Germany have excellent relations, as do Russia and Germany.

In particular, it is to their great credit and an example to all that Israel and Germany have been able to get along in peace and security after the fact of the Holocaust. It is no less remarkable that post WW II Germany and Russia can get along famously in the contemporary world and have relations that not only are civil, but in fact are cordial and trusting, given that 25m Russians died in WW II because of the Nazi German invasion of the then Soviet Union Russian homeland.

This is so because the Europeans and Eurasians have finally, at long last, learned to bury the hatchet. The evidence and result is most prominently manifested in the fact and reality of the European Union. Some people finally learn, others never do nor are they capable of learning. This fact and reality are indeed true.

People in the early United States quickly learned that survival, success and development is predicated on burying the hatchet, so we did so in respect to attackers and invaders from Europe during the French and Indian Wars, then the British during the Revolutionary War, the British during the War of 1812, the British support of the Confederacy during the Civil War (1860-65), Germany during WW I, Nazi Germany during WW II, fascist Japan during WW II, Vietnam where the US fought unsuccessfully for a longer time than we did during the brilliantly successful American Revolution. Each of these counties inter alia and their peoples have been allies of the United States since the onset of the post WW II period, as witnessed by NATO among other alliances economic and military.

The 5000 year old Chinese more than any other people need to learn to forgive, if not forget rather than keep a scoresheet and to keep tallying the score here there and everywhere to 'settle old scores'.

We should render respect to Bill Clinton who while president said that too many countries of the world have "too much history." If one is of the New World, it is easy to know and understand Bill Clinton's analysis and remarks. That is, while the New World lives in the present and thinks and plans for a constructive and cooperative future, the Old World, such as the Melosevics, Maos and others live in the present and think only of the past and their nagging grudges, revenges and vengeances. They don't know how to give it up to build for a positive and constructive future. Rather, they live for the vengeance of past grievances. They have too fukcing much history to be sure. For sure.

It indeed is impossible to build a positive and constructive future while being focused and obsessed on the past and constructing a future predicated on revenge and vengeance. The sovereign Republic of Taiwan lives in the present and thinks and prepares for the prosperous democratic future, all the while being on guard against the vengeful and rooted in history obsessives in Beijing. Indeed, had the Gwo Min Dang won the Civil War, the mainland of China would be as comprehensively well developed as is Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan etc etc and focused on he future instead of obsessing over the past and planning revenge and vengeance.

Grow up Jung Gwo. Get real. Join the modern and future world. Leave the fukcing past where it belongs, i.e., in the past. Learn to forgive if not to forget.

"And by attempting to tie yourself to the Jewish experience in the Germany, which you clearly don't understand, and the black experience in the US and Brazil, which you are further in ignorance about, you simply make yourself look like a wannabe aggrieved, an emotional parasite living off of the suffering of others for your own sustenance. "

*yawn*. I have to wonder just how long did it take Hitomi to write all that drivel anyway? This is kinda funny because I recognize this circular logic and writing from somewhere. Yes, it was from the disgraced poster freetrader, but this hitomi poster's writings are a little more vulgar, a little more angry, a little more arrogant, and a little more racist . What's up with this sock puppet drama and posing as a japanese woman? What a sad trolling attempt.

Now regarding the meat of this Hitomi character's post, as a China-basher (and a psychotic one at that) it's expected that this guy will not be able to empathize with China's plight during the later part of the qing dynasty. It's also expected that he will try to white wash western powers colonizing China. So how did his attempts go? Hitomi argued that the foreign colonists built the best university in China. *sigh* Really? That's it? That's it? Because of this it's okay for China to be colonized? This is even worse than something which your average fenqing can come up with to justify taking over tibet.

Lastly, I find it ironic that Hitomi brought up the book "Shua cong ming de Zhongguo ren". It's ironic because Hitomi's posts indicates that he is superficial, vain, full of hatred, and he clearly likes to pretend to be smarter than he actually is. So yes, many Chinese are dumber than they try to look, but as the case with Hitomi, this is not a problem exclusive to the Chinese population.

Now Hitomi really wants to read a good book which criticizes Chinese people, he can easily look up some of Lu Xun's works. It was writing a while ago yet it criticizes Chinese people far better than the "Shua cong ming de Zhongguo ren" book. But let's be honest here, hitomi is not here to debate or to learn, but to bash, with his many sockpuppets :)

"*yawn*. I have to wonder just how long did it take Hitomi to write all that drivel anyway? This is kinda funny because I recognize this circular logic and writing from somewhere. Yes, it was from the disgraced poster freetrader, but this hitomi poster's writings are a little more vulgar, a little more angry, a little more arrogant, and a little more racist . What's up with this sock puppet drama and posing as a japanese woman? What a sad trolling attempt."

Not much time, in fact--hence the typos. Sadly, XTIANGGODLOKI, you are only proving the point I made earlier about your understanding of logic (as well as your pathetic attempts at cleverness). Circular reasoning would involve failing to provide a logical argument for your objection while pretending you have made a stronger case by changing the words of your argument slightly--you don’t seem to know this, since it is exactly what you do. My logic, unlike yours, rests on the fact that the Jewish experience in WWII and the sufferings of slavery are many times worse in severity and intent than anything the Chinese can blame "the West" for; and that speaking of China's "colonization" by the West by reference to the Jews and the slave trade is nothing more than a perverse attempt at stealing the suffering of others when you can’t make a case for your own, by making your case stronger by falsely linking your argument to stronger terms. If anything, making your feeble argument only helps to reveal how deranged the Chinese have become, as Jews, African-Americans, Liberians, African Brazilians, Haitians, etc. have historically left their grievances behind far better than the Chinese, despite suffering from “the West” far more.

Now, since you can’t get around that and recognize that you have nothing other than circular logic (which helps in a crassly idiom-based culture) and OUTRAGE, you claim my writing closely resembles that of freetrader while providing no counterpoint to my argument. Impressive side-step. I submit my writing to you for analysis. Find the similarities in phrasing. In terminology. In experience. Don’t wimp out and whine more. Prove it. If you recognize something, provide the evidence of similarities. You can even ask FP moderators to confirm whether freetrader and I log in from the same continent. Any evidence for your baseless claims, really. I am this confident because we both know your claims are meaningless, the result of a paranoid flailing in the dark.

"Now regarding the meat of this Hitomi character's post, as a China-basher (and a psychotic one at that) it's expected that this guy will not be able to empathize with China's plight during the later part of the qing dynasty. It's also expected that he will try to white wash western powers colonizing China."

My dear man, but you haven’t addressed the meat at all! You have not even responded to the historical fact that China was not colonized, but half-colonized with treaty ports and concessions. You may very well claim that this is an attempt to “white-wash” western powers colonizing China, but then you’d have to face the fact that this point was noted by none other than Sun Yat-Sen, who saw China primarily threatened economically, not militarily or morally. The vast majority of Chinese never suffered from full-scale colonization the likes of which beset Malaysia (for resources) and Western Africa (for slaves). You might address these points, but I suspect you lack the knowledge to do so. As for empathy, there is no requirement to empathize with China’s “plight” in the Qing because the overwhelming majority of Chinese suffering was self-made and home-grown. Do you empathize with the US's "plight" over the drug trade which stems from Columbia and Mexico? Thought not. The self-made includes the boxers, by the way, who initially stemmed from groups of Chinese bandits that had taken up refuge in the backwoods areas of Shandong, and were occasionally supported by the land-lords there, as they would eventually be supported by the Qing itself. The boxers were similar, it seems, to China’s current group of cyber criminals. Of course, one might still empathize with these types, but they’ve already become more of a danger to their own people than they are a help. The Chinese people can’t do anything about them because they are supported by people with power, so the Chinese “choose” to defend them. The non-criminals will suffer for the crimes of the bandits, but the PRC government doesn't really care. It is bandit #1.

"So how did his attempts go? Hitomi argued that the foreign colonists built the best university in China. *sigh* Really? That's it? That's it? Because of this it's okay for China to be colonized?"

You do have a way with making yourself look more ignorant. It’s not an argument; it is a fact. You’ve already avoided the meat of my argument above, so why not simply bite off a nub of this point and pretend it constitutes the whole. I give the US as one instance since it obviously isn’t responsible for every nation. So tell me, in comparison with the US giving China its best university and best hospital, as well as flying the hump over ChongQing in WWII, arming the Chinese government to fight against Japan, defeating the Japanese (ho-hum), dropping food supplies to Chinese citizens in Changchun who were being starved to death by the communists, not bombing China despite China’s attack on the UN and US forces in Korea, opening China to free trade (for Deng had two tours, you know), granting China massive developmental aid through the World Bank (40% of the funding of which comes from the US), precisely how much death and destruction was the US was responsible in late Qing China? If you’re going to be pissy about it, dear fenqing, you should know. Speaking of “the West” all the time is a little too crass, even for you. Unless, of course, you just mean "white people" or "Jews", as your buddy on the other article clearly indicated. Then I will assume it is just crass enough.

"Lastly, I find it ironic that Hitomi brought up the book "Shua cong ming de Zhongguo ren". It's ironic because Hitomi's posts indicates that he is superficial, vain, full of hatred, and he clearly likes to pretend to be smarter than he actually is. So yes, many Chinese are dumber than they try to look, but as the case with Hitomi, this is not a problem exclusive to the Chinese population.
Now Hitomi really wants to read a good book which criticizes Chinese people, he can easily look up some of Lu Xun's works. It was writing a while ago yet it criticizes Chinese people far better than the "Shua cong ming de Zhongguo ren" book. But let's be honest here, hitomi is not here to debate or to learn, but to bash, with his many sockpuppets :)"

Actually, what is really ironic is that you say all this and still obviously haven’t read the book, which just goes to show you pretend you know something you clearly don’t out (so clever!). That tendency on your part certainly approaches the AQ spirit which is taught in public schools in China even today. Yet anyone who thinks they are being enlightening by raising Lu Xun in this context is at a loss for resources, both overestimating his own knowledge and underestimating that of his audience. I'm guessing that means you are overseas Chinese, as this is their wont. Do you even speak Hanyu or read Zhongwen?

Would that the problem were confined to AQ’s observations, as then it might be, to the Chinese mind, safely confined to the past. That’s what the Chinese educational system attempts to do with AQ, anyway, feigning (ignorantly) the pathologies he addressed were both the symptom and reaction to "Western Imperialism". Hence it is not informative to invoke AQ here; no, this is a problem of the present, and only an individual as ignorant as the fenqing would dismiss a book published on the problem only last year without actually having read it. Irony, whether you understand it or not, has come to bite you in the ass. I’m here to learn and debate. I’d like to see you teach me something. You haven’t yet. Step it up.

HITOMI: 4

XTIANGODLOKI: 0

It ain't over yet till the fat lady sings -- oh, here she comes on stage now!

I totally agree with the calling for forgiveness from the victims to the accused as this is a treasurable part of human virtue, certainly shared by the Chinese people. But I just find it is a little cruel to ask these victims to forgive the makers of their sufferings, (partly or completely, this is not the point here) when these criminals are denying their guilts.

It is admirable that the Israelis have forgiven Germany. But do you think this would still be the case if the Germans kept saying that the concentration camp was not true, the genecide did not exist, the Jews are blaming them for blackmailing aids. And with considerations of all this kind of denials, I really think that it is an abuse of human mercy, and also of the forgiveness for international communities as well as for Chinese people themselves to impose this groundless forgiveness.

Knowing the victims or sons of the victims are still waiting for sincere apologies but not the expedient ones. They have been waiting for more than half a century and no hope is yet lit, probably before closing their eyes.

Take your long list of self pity and self indulgent victimhood to some international forums of equity and some international tribunals of justice where, unlike in the PRC/CCP modern considerations of human rights are a factor.

I know India is always in the forefront of your thoughts, scattered and as confounded as they are, so I offer you a view from India to consider instead of spouting the CCP/PRC line concerning the Indian state of Arunanchai Pradesh and of Tibet etc etc (as taught in PRC schools and in 'historical' lectures on CCTV).

The view from India that I get is that the Indian government considers the PRC's new and growing aggressiveness in island and islet border disputes in the East - and its support of the Cheonan sinking to include the bombardment of Yeonpyeong, as well as the incident with Japan concerning their battering ram 'fishing boat' captain - to be a prelude to a new aggressiveness towards the border disputes at China's West that resulted in the brief Sino-India war of 1962, which ended when PLA troops retreated back into Beijing occupied Tibet.

Accordingly, the India government has begun the additional deployment of two infantry mountain divisions, one to the state immediately south of Arunanchai Pradesh and the other in a state next to Burma, the latter in the event the CCP decides to pursue border based military action against India by also using its client and ally Burma/Myanmar as another launching point of any such aggressions.

The view in India is that the India government took Pres Obama's announcement during his recent visit, of support of a permanent seat for India on the UNSC, to be in part an endorsement of its new border deployments to counter the massive presence of PLA forces across from India's borders given the CCP?PRC new aggressions in the East.

Indeed, a regionally aggressive China is the new norm in East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia. Dictatorial and arbitrary China has begun to scare people.

It is expected that you know too little about your country USA: USA is not a signatory to the World Court of Justice. Bush Jr refused to joint the other nations to be a founding member because he was afraid the court will get him some day. If USA submitted to the International Court, the Iranian would have get him through the court for invasion of Iraq for no reasons.

It is interesting how you mentioned that South Tibet was part of the larger Tibet before British stole the region and India annexed it and the truth was only taught in China and CCTV. I know you toe the lines of India and USA but I hope they did not revised the truth of history books. If they do, then you had been brain washed in your schooling. If you don't believe it, just look up the location of Tawang. People in Tawang speak Tibetan and the 7th Dalai Lama was born in the city. If you find out that you had been brainwashed, you should sue your own government for some monetary compensation.

Pubicus, you are very forgetful. Just not too long ago, China is in support of many countries to be part of the permanent security council members, including India. On the other hand, USA is just paying lip service to India with empty words. Actually, USA takes no step in pushing the issue. With so many additional permanent members in the security council, it is in no advantage for USA. Just one Cofi Annan was enough for them and now they have to deal with the Hindus and the Sikhs. No way!

Indian cultures, arts and food are admirable contributions to the world. However, India society has many problems. One of the free export from China to India is Mao's ideology of class struggles. Mao's ideological doctrine is very appealing to the people who had been oppressed or impoverished deliberately by another dominant racial groups or class. This teaching proved very good in China's case which evicted the fake democratic government that ruled China onto Taiwan. Also, India has Naxaulites, the Sikhs, Islamic Kashmir, South Tibet that are determined to break away from India. Whether India will survive or disintegrate like the Soviets is a question still be observed in the short future. As India is militarily strong and is up grading by purchasing a lot of expensive weapons, it 70% poor populace is starving to death. Large amount of its GDP had been used to buy foreign made weaponry while its economy was suffering. It is in the same situation as the Soviet was in: militarily strong but weak in economy. Although India is growing, but its rich gets richer and the poor gets poorer. Why should China worry about India? And for your information, China has about half of the India deployed military soldiers at the mutual border. It is India which has worry over China. Therefore, you had toed the Indian line correctly.

Over the last 2000 years, China believed in peace and had built the "the Great Wall of China" to fend off foreign invaders. However, as history had proved, it would not work. The "big gun" diplomacy prevails. Therefore, China believes in defense with a strong military while China rises to be equal.

Yep, it's the end of the peaceful rise of the CCP/PRC. The peaceful rise theme always was bogus to begin with.

As China had said many times, it wishes to develop the country in every aspect in peace and in peaceful atmosphere. Why is USA being a bad boy not to leave it alone? USA's foreign policies, unlike its domestic polices, are hegemonic and will not leave anyone in peace. Bad boy!

There are 800 000 000 people in the PRC living on USD $2 a day or less. The boyz in Beijing try to fig leaf that but fail. The boyz in Beijing don't care because their rationale is that there always are poor people - always have been, always will be. Indeed, Beijing's attitude guarantees it. The attitude that farmers can't run a government also guarantees the dictatorship of the past 5000 years that is so deeply rooted in the Jung Gwo soil.

Hey, you never asked me my side of it. Whether you care or not, I'm gonna tell you my side. One day about 20 years ago I was leafing through a dictionary when a sketch of Chairman Mao caught my eye. Next to it, lo and behold was the word 'vengeance.' So I started poking around into the possible connection which brings us to the present. Today after reading your post I went to a Chinese-English dictionary to look up the term 'cross hairs' and damn, there I was, just as you said. You're lucent, so much so that you're in danger of spontaneously combusting. Try not to go near anything flammable, like your eternal temperament.

Are you a fenqing too? I not sure because you seem even beyond being that, so you leave me looking for the right word.

Anyway, spit much do you?

During my time in the PRC I met and made many Chinese friends and more than a few PRC friends too. The Chinese friends were wonderful, we still communicate, a few have moved to or are moving to the US with their families, others coming here to study - I've seen some in a happy reunion; I'll see them all. As to my CCP friends, they could be civil and always were frank which told me a lot about the CCP, its idiocy and its grandiose and sinister designs. (Well, civil except for almost all of the fenqing who while they weren't civil were nonetheless the most foul of temperament.)

But these are old egg drops on the wall. I mean, somebody says Americans are the worst barbarians on the planet, others say the French eat brains while others say the Chinese are loud and, well, vengeful. Here's a grain of salt - one for you, one for me.

Cheers.

(Really, don't stop with just one warmup post, okay? Pour it on! Show us all that you got.)

I see the ChiCom trolls are out in force this morning, Enjoy the smoke and mirrors, lads. Sooner or later, three quarters of your populace is going to wake up and realize that they're being squeezed out--and they're not going to be happy.

I get a clear sense that you'd like to step outside for a moment to discuss this further.

You first.....

My post about possibly stepping outside is of course in response to your standing there with a knife in your teeth, ammunition belts X-crossed on your torso, grenades dangling off your waist belt, the combat boots etc etc.

As I'd said 'Chinbo' after you....

China and India are freak of nature countries and there's no denying it. The two countries are in a category of their own among the world of nations. Each have more than a billion people, a culture of huge families to protect as best as possible against ancient peasant mass poverty even in the best of times, and make Asia the continent where by sheer numbers two-thirds of the world's poor live.

No other countries remotely approach the freak nature of each China and India. They together are on a separate and dubious tier. The point is that while one of these hapless countries has developed a society that reasonably subjects itself to the opinions and will of the people -- India -- the other continues to be rooted in absolutism, unyielding elitism, shameless autocracy and oligarchy, i.e., China, more recently the PRC ruled cruelly by the new dynasty of the CCP.

Regardless of ideology, the United States which is third in population with a mere 310 000 000 demonstrates that this size of population makes it far less challenging to create a country of middle class people. Indeed, China has more people living in abject poverty than the United States has people - the same is true of India.

Each China and India have a hopeless task before them, but at least India isn't militantly and irreversably anti democracy. Democracies by their very nature develop the whole of the human being and give the individual citizen great responsibility and, concomitantly, due human respect. Conversely, the elite win-lose dictators of China like a population of sheeple.

China in this equation can only lose, inherently.

@PUBLICUS
I believe you misunderstood yin and yang. The pair is not to force us to take 1 or 0; instead, they are used to analyze opposing trends and ideas. In the philosophies of Kant and Hegel , we recognize many yin and yang in the name of dialectics.

5000 year dictatorship
It depends on how you defines the term dictatorship. Hitler found his fortune in a democracy, and built a true dictatorship. Of course, there were many dictators in China’s 5000 year history. But, many emperors did not dictate; rather, they asked competent people how to rule.

Western version of democracy is good if the economy is good as well. The government basically does not need to rule. But in tough economy, you may run into problems. For example, GOP is opposing every single proposal Obama suggested. I do not think GOP is an evil party. Rather I think US is facing some differences that possess the nature of yin and yang. I have a belief that US will overcome the gridlock soon or later. But, if China has such a gridlock, the consequence can be bloody. Chinese are definitely not the smartest people in the world, because they are still searching a better way to mange differences while maintaining a general unity.

they are wrong and arrogant. I've seen so many examples of these bashings that I feel some Chinese overreaction to it almost makes sense.

Just reread your post and see how arrogant it is. This kind of bashing, along with the kind by Hitomi is essentially under the same logic the fenqings use when they try to brainwash themselves.

Look, China was under "5000 years of dictatorship" only because it has a long history. How about the West and India? Compare their democratic history to their authoritarian one, which is longer? Did you have a democracy driven by "Western Liberal Idea" 500 years ago? And why is China so slow you ask? Well, it certainly had something to do with the West including Japan (which is a painfully Western country-I don't know why some would think otherwise).

I'm not saying China doesn't have itself to blame. In particular the anti-modern trend in some of its core value system. It had to be changed and it's hopefully changing already. China has no obligation to westernize itself but if that is the only route to modernize I'd gladly let it happen. No matter, it's not gonna happen tonight or in the next decade.

China has stressed time and again that it takes time for it to be better and yet no one in the West is listening.

The point here, however, is not that China will eventually be a Western country, but that a country and its people should be treated with respect in the international community despite what current situation they are in.

The view that China must change into a Western state instantaneously to be equal to the West is the exact Eurocentrism that helped grow our bunch of fenqing. In fact, there's no much difference between these people and the fenqing.

No one denies that China uses propaganda to control the mass, corruption and unfair treatment of citizens happen daily etc. However, these have nothing to do with a sovereignty dispute with Japan. Nor does it have to do with how much duty China should carry facing global warming. Yet whenever China tries to assert its (I'm not even gonna say rightful) demands the West get together and dismiss it with the same old excuse that China is "authoritarian" or "communist".

The "peaceful" rise of China is not some political ideal. Chinese people have little of ideals in the last few decades. It's a strategy made after considering China's geopolitical situation and international background. If the situations continue to allow China to rise peacefully then it's a rational result that China follows that route. You may also notice that despite how authoritarian China is, most of its decisions are rational even if under a misguided rationale. If the West continues to build up the Chinese Threat tension, then the room for China to flexibly handle issues with other countries will only decrease.

The West is often frustrated when their planned trajectory for a "benign" Chinese growth is "betrayed" by the Chinese. But what they fail to realize is that this issue should not be handled in a "China should do this and that because we are better" manner, but in a series of compromises between China and the international community.

On another side, the West's incessant sharp criticisms often harm China's progress in civil rights, usually by government propaganda linking them to Western racism/imperialism. And you can't even say these criticisms aren't linked to the concept of Chinese as a threat instead of a people.

For example, Chinese government after Deng has no real antagonism towards religion. It's fine with it as long as religion doesn't threaten its power. In fact, many lower officials are quite religious themselves. Yet the constant bashing of China's religion policy by the West has only made it easier for Chinese people to believe that some outside power is trying to control them via religions.

And whenever this point is brought up, some will say "the Chinese people deserve it because they don't fight for their rights." Yeah, a bloody revolution and collapse of order in a 1.4 bn population society is certain a good thing for the world.

Each you and I equally understand and comprehend yin and yang, so there isn't any reason to say otherwise. My reference to yin and yang is societal, cultural - not quantitative or in numerical terms. While I'm thinking in terms of values, mores, norms - nowhere did I present numerical values - it seems you are thinking literally in numerical values and in quantitative terms. I studied maths but I'm speaking from a Liberal Arts background and (long) history.

As to dictators, finding a dictator doesn't depend on anything except when in history to find the dictator and in which place. Dictatorship is dictatorship denotatively and in whatever context or circumstance. Hitler was a dictator, as were Stalin, Mao and many others. There isn't any variable involved.

Have a nice day.

Should correct for clarity: "We oppose autocratic censorship even when not having censorship threatens to tear..."

Also, obviously the second last paragraph should be in quotes.

It looks like you are in the "pasting and repasting" mode again,ie, you just repast some thing you write some time ago in other columns. Let me refresh your memory of what I wrote about these lines you toe from the Hindu Sharma.

"China is a country and people of a 5000 year dictatorship." I guess you are confused with dictatorship and authoritarian regime. As China had refused fake democracy and kicked out that fake government to Taiwan, China had welcomed the present regime for experiment and Deng brought China into the Modern age. Actual time of dictatorship with Kings and Queens should be about 5000-100= 4900 years. As for USA who had descended from the Anglo-saxon UK, the number of dictatorship years is: 1500-200 = 1300 years. Before 1500 years ago is: -500 years of middle age of religion prosecution to drive out the Christian by the Celts. About two 2000 years ago, Celts were enslaved by the Roman. 3000 years ago: barbarian and cannibalism. I guess feudalism is better than barbarianism. There was good reason why the Chinese built the "great wall" to fend off barbarians by the Han Dynasty.

Deng had invented this fast route to rich and governance. The democratic slow route took 150 years for USA to get strong after WWII. China's route takes about 50 years to become equal to USA. It seems other countries may follow. People are now start to talk about the Beijing consensus.

Democracy, after 200 years of experiment, is about to end. The idea of democracy started by the Greeks and the end begins with the Greeks. For the first 150 years, democracy was sustained by raiding, invasions, and conquered other people's land. These conquering and invasions resulted in mass fortune to keep the democratic people rich and prosper. Over history, the Mongolian had raided many places for fortune and would not take any prisoners unless surrender prior to the invasion. And for democracy after the 150 years, it withdraw from invasion and conquering because the people revolted. During the last 50 years, democracy system of government spent the fortune amassed from the previous 150 years. The fortunes are about to be depleted. The first one that bankrupted is the Greeks who had started it first. It seems Portugal and Spain are in the downward train. Next comes Hungry. They had to seek help from the European Union. For the strongest hold, USA, it is already dig itself into a hole with debt on trillion dollars. And the amount of debt is still climbing. Evidences of the decline of democracy are every where. In another 25 years, its fortune will be totally depleted.

With one advise to the declining democracy: Grow up and think for yourself. Let the farmers learn how to govern too.

George Washington was a farmer as was Pres Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, as were other presidents to include James Madison, James Monroe, John Tyler, James Polk, Andrew Johnson and, to leap to more recent times, the Nobel Peace Laureate Jimmy Carter. Other notables of American agriculture were George Mason who with Jefferson drew up the Bill of Rights, Patrick Henry famous for his ringing declaration to the British Crown, "Give me liberty or give me death."

But, alas, these were 'gentleman' farmers in the United States, a well educated and wealthy lot who left you Jung Gwo behind centuries ago. You're still chewing the dust, coughing and spitting it up. Yet another old score to settle.

Is it your advice or it's my advice: ...let the farmers learn how to govern too.

So many farmers. However, Jimmy Carter was a Nobel Peace Laureate for as a peanut farmer, President, or as a cabinet woodworker? I can't remember any more. He's a good man, unlike Obama who had tricked the Nobel committee to give him one too. The American people will not let him do it: the new START has not been ratified yet by the Senate.

These farmers are good man. Having said that, they should learn how to govern and develop the USA. From independence to WW II, that is about 150 years. They had not governed the country well. Look at Deng, it started from 1979 and to now is 31 years. China is closing fast to USA which had developed for 200 years. USA really need my advice: let the farmers learn how to govern too.

When it comes to your "Bill of Rights", that is the biggest joke in the world. When George Mason and Jefferson drew up that piece of paper, they were afraid Lincoln would read it (for argument assuming Lincoln was in the same period). Lincoln would have revised it to: Bill of Rights, not including Black.

And Joker Patrick Henry is famous for his ringing declaration to the British Crown, "Give me liberty "for whites" or give me death.". Henry was right, Black can vote after 1960s.

The economic development of the United States during the 2nd half of the 19th century and during he 20th century paralleled the developments of the basic ways and means to create a modern society. By the time the dictator Dung [sic] Xiao Peng came to power he'd already had these creations and others handed to him on a platter.

I speak of the period of time in the US and the West during which the inventions and creations which made the modern world were developed: steam power, railroads, the telegraph, telephone, now the cell phone, the Bessemer process to make steel, electrical grids for urban centers then nations, the automobile and then mass production of it on a new thingy called the assembly line, radio, television, satellites, the ice box then the refrigerator, the underground/subway, buses and coaches, the aeroplane, construction of massive new dams and bridges, a national system of highways and roads, banks and banking systems, global exploration to open new markets and introduce new goods and services -- I of course could go on. When little Dung [sic] came to power (a very short man) he already had these things at his disposal and a fascist dictatorship to boot.

All the while the Chinese under yet another ancient and decrepit dynasty, the Qing, were telling the West to fukc off because the Jung Gwo already knew eternal (static) truth and reality and long since had everything you needed under Heaven. What you got as the consequence of your own self satisfied, smug, inborn, inbred and self isolating arrogant stupidity was shat upon by the radically dynamic world of creative (and aggressive) visionaries. Your (extended) May 4, 1919 Movement only made things worse. Then of course in the 1930s along came the Meiji-Showa Japanese against whom you were even more feeble, helpless and a self embarrassment.

And guess what? You learned nothing of human value or consequence. All you got from this and more is grudge, revenge and vengeance. You continue to know only the facile and ancient Old World 'answers.' Yes indeed, you're going to get even with the world any day now, and before much longer you're going to settle old scores, all of 'em and everywhere.

How many hundreds of millions of people will be vaporized because of it? And you still lose, a nation of whiners, vengeance seekers, eternal losers.

First let me say it's refreshing to hear a calm tone of voice that presents certain points in some reasonably balanced way and which is not an attack post, even if does contain the glittering emotive messages about peace, love, harmony -- you must be new around here (I speak tongue in cheek of course). I can feel there is also heart in the post.

Your point about the Industrial Revolution beginning in Britain, then extending into a Second Industrial Revolution in the United States and of credit and investment cash markets, also speaks to the point made by those who claim development is best, i.e., fastest, when led by dictators, and their model of the state as the ultimate factor. In particular, you reference the extant tens of trillions of investment and cash dollars that over a short period of history have been created -- some 250 years -- as being ready made and accessible to present, newly developing markets.

Yes, the developing markets that are the back-kickers have the vital beneficial factor of extant broad and deep, sophisticated, established, very wealthy capital markets to draw on for their growth. It took two centuries of efforts by the front runners to create and develop capital markets, systems of transportation, communication, production (quality production especially) and a form of government to facilitate the growth and development of these markets. Over this brief 250 years this was accomplished effectively in both economics and in social equity. The Dutch, for instance, had a national scale bank before there was a Bank of England. All of this and more constitute an awesome materialism that has radically improved the standard of living, quality of life; human development.

So yes again, the developing markets have this ready made capital for them to call on, to exploit. It's essentially the same as organizing a footrace in which the starting line of a back kicker is placed 50 yards out ahead the starting line of their predecessor runners. Yes, because such back kickers as India and China have so many consumers, they of course will benefit from this compensatory circumstance of history. However, while we know markets such as the PRC and India will become the largest, it remains impossible for either country to develop its massive population to the same per capita extent as have the reasonably populated Western countries, or to a same or similar extent as other advanced economies such as exist in Singapore, Taiwan, Botswana South Korea et al.

Certain people who in their posts and in their specious purposes fail to see this silver platter gleaming into their eye, to argue instead that their rapid development is due to dictatorship, have only dictatorship per se and self serving elitism into perpetuity on their vacuous and vapid agenda.

With your blurry eyes on this world, I bet you had just woken up from your morning nap. Opening up your eyes to the world of foreign affairs, then you see the world is cruel and full of injustice. Sometimes it is fortunate to have blurry eyes, then you won't see those supposedly fair and equal platform in the world stages are merely mirages in the desert. Try not to wake up, my friend. Have blurry eyes on this world, it makes life happier!

As you said, the British had united India from conflicting chaos and it may be a good thing. Whereas for China, the world had tried to split it. There were kings and queens in the Qing Dynasty, but the ruler had promoted racial harmony as a policy. The door to the outside world was closed because they just wanted to mind their own business in peace. However, Western countries hacked it open with axes and guns for the purpose of selling opium to the Chinese people. All these wars on China were ratified by democratic countries for partial colonization of China. Ant that was just 100 years ago. And now these democratic countries preaches justice and equality with Bible in hand when in fact their hands are still dripping with blood. And lately, some supposedly democratic countries still wave their guns while their government searches for weapons of mass destruction in other country. Domestically, democracy is a good thing to the country's own people, but it does nothing for foreign affairs to other countries. So democracy is just a tool or selecting a ruler. And China is just in the early development of the structure of governance which may eventually will include more people in the selection of leaders. The point here is that democracy itself is not equal to fairness, compassion, rule of law, peace, or justice in treating other countries. It only applies to domestic matters. Some people preaches democracy to other countries to cover their guilt in recent wars and raiding.

So many people were paid to rally for the separation of Tibet from China. I am going to pose a hard question to you: how will India and China resolve the problem of South Tibet (the Arunachal Pradesh)? When will India allow the Dalai Lama to visit freely his own people, Tibetans, in Tawang?

I'm certain the democracies you refer to that in the 2nd half of the 19th century sliced and slivered the imperial and decrepit China culture, society and civilization into their own respective zones had remained in China, China today would be a democracy, would be broadly and deeply prosperous; the Chinese would be supremely better educated, culturally developed (rather than be sub-subcultral), oriented toward the constructive present and future rather than be unhealthily obsessed about past grievances that instead would have long since been forgotten. You long ago would have begun to enjoy a radically higher standard of living, quality of life and be flourishing in your human development. In the 1930s-40s you would have been part of a global alliance/league of democracies and would not have suffered the indignities of the then fascist Japanese trampling your lands and massacreing your people at will.

You and the world would be and would have been a better place for the past 100 years than it or China/the PRC/CCP in fact have been or are today.

The dialectic of colonialism is easy to know and to understand, easier to explain - especially to fenqing. Colonialism, which originated with monarchy, existed during the inevitable transition from monarchy to democracy. If still today we had monarchy, we still would have colonialism. However, because democracy inevitably prevailed over monarchy -- democratic republicanism especially -- the last dog of colonalism finally and long ago died its eventually miserable death.

There are easy, perhaps facile instances of countries where colonialism in transition was more or less successful. British colonialism in North America was so successful, i.e., simultaneously beneficial and cruel, that it had to be forcefully and forcably expelled by a determined people who passed the point of no return against it. India did this in its own way but until only recently had failed to capitalize on their inevitable gain of independence. China on the scorecard gets scratched, a really lost opportunity -- lost due to its own continuing feudalism which presently manifests as the new but same-same dynasty of the grudge beridden CCP.

You have a certain symmetry to your statement in which you claim both discrete distinctions and to have some heart of some ancient supposedly unfathomable nature.

Try to synthesize too, or more so. More consistent of course would be for you to "defend" USA domestic and foreign policy which is predicated on the values of the European Enlightenment, and to "denounce" the Jung Gwo domestic and foreign policy which are predicated on the unitary system of the Middle Kingdom as the future hegemon of one dimensional dictatorship in opposition to the classic Western liberal idea and its various diverse applications.

You have to synthesize otherwise all you have is a split cross-eyed decision. Take the four factors and unify them. If you would do that, you should come to the positions I present above. I'd also offer the suggestion not to rely very much on cold calculating logic, to try instead to have some sense and heart too.

Can you speak the language of the Anglo-Saxon? I don't understand Gaelic.