The Real China
China has been getting a hard wrap in the media lately, and perhaps an even harder wrap in the coffee shops and water coolers around the western world. It’s my opinion that China has been stereotyped, and many people thinking about China ensure that their views to comply with the stereotype. Sometimes that leads to correct outcomes, for instance we’re right not to condone China’s censorship of the internet. Other times, however, it leads to people being mislead. An article recently published in The New Yorker provides an amazing insight into the minds of the educated 20-somethings doing their thing in China today. I’m amazed by how much of their opinion I identify with.
The gist is that the new generation of Chinese are well off, well educated and prepared to hold firmly to brave but intelligent opinions. The article revolves around an interview with Tang Jie who made this video which went viral in China attracting millions of views and vocal support.
Tang Jie argues that his peers are perfectly aware of government censorship and bypassing internet filters with proxy servers is second nature to them. Hence they’ve become very critical and discerning when reading opinions or watching main-steam media. He argues that the people who can be brainwashed by media is not the Chinese as we’d like to believe, but rather us Westerners. Because we implicitly trust our media there’s more potential for us to get caught up in something we ought to be critical of.
Naturally that isn’t a ticket to become a skeptic about everything the old-media tells us, but it certainly should be cause for thought. As the Tibet controversy started to unfold my initial instinct was to side with China because I couldn’t imagine anything worse than living in a feudal theocracy. But I didn’t encounter anyone who thought the same way. The other interesting ‘human rights record’ matter I’d have you reconsider in China’s treatment of the Falun Gong (Wikipedia article here). The old-media’s opinion is that Falun Gong is a legitimate religion that is being oppressed by the China which, because of communism, is anti-religion. It seems to me that the is a very strong argument that the Falun Gong is actually a cult similar to Scientology and China is being quite discerning in its treatment of them. Meanwhile stories about organ harvesting are nothing more than a Falun Gong public-relations exercise.
I’ll leave you with what I thought was a genuine nugut of wisdom from Tang:
“We accept all the values of human rights, of democracy,” Tang told me. “We accept that. The issue is how to realize it.”
Tang thinks that we should not pursue values as an end in themselves, but as a gateway to the good life. Having a right to bare arms isn’t a reason in itself to bare arms. There are better things to fight for than the benefits of democracy and free speech if you can obtain those benefits regardless.
I wonder if you actually read the wikipedia article? What do you base the statement that Falun Gong is a cult on? Direct experience with Falun Gong yourself? A notable scholar or body of scholarship? Fieldwork published in academic journals? That’s actually Chinese Communist Party propaganda. It was part of their propaganda campaign. If you read a bit widely about this you’ll soon realise as much. All major sources on Falun Gong, so, like, scholars, the UN, human rights orgs, and MSM, generally speaking, have identified Falun Gong as a spiritual group, with some perhaps peculiar beliefs, but ultimately harmless, and suffering a very nasty persecution. Do you have any evidence to the contrary. Why do you say the CCP has been “quite discerning”? Falun Gong are the majority of torture cases in China, just this one group. I hope you do not regard the torture methods used against Falun Gong, such as rape, gang rape, extreme torture with electric batons, beatings, hanging with handcuffs or cords for days, tying up in painful positions until paralysis, injection with nerve-damaging drugs, organ harvesting (YES, READ THIS: http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=8237) etc., “discerning”? Surely you mustn’t. Please read what scholars have written about this issue, and maybe even find where the nearest Falun Gong practitioners are–they’re in every major city–and go and grill them with 20 questions and see what they’re like.
jjyz said this on 15 July 2008 at 11:28 am
Thanks for your reply. I agree that gaining knowledge with any degree of epistemic validity is very difficult on issues like this. For instance, it seems me that the reports of torture are simply FG propaganda, whereas you say they are CCP propaganda. The only way to resolve that is with evidence, but I haven’t seen any compelling evidence from either side. So I can only assume that it is not true, given that (philosophically and legally) the burden of proof must fall on people making claims about the world. If you counter that the evidence has been concealed by the CCP - you’re the one advocating a conspiracy theory.
Another way for us to settle a debate like this is by looking at things both sides agree on. It seems to be that both sides agree that FG doesn’t believe in conventional medicine of any sort and FG rejects the scientific method. Scientology is heavily criticised for rejecting one aspect of modern medicine - everyone seems to agree that FG rejects the whole lot. That is a hugely dangerous, destructive and delusional belief.
If I was running or managing a state I would want all my citizens to have adequate health care. I think the UN would agree.
Greg Sadler said this on 15 July 2008 at 1:46 pm
“We accept all the values of human rights, of democracy,” Tang told me. “We accept that. The issue is how to realize it.”
—very much agreed
xiaobushuo said this on 15 July 2008 at 5:12 pm
interesting. I have also made the connection between Falun Gong and Scientology but must question if that is not ignorance itself. I was living in China at the time the government launched the huge media campaign against Falun Gong practitioners as ones who do not believe in medicine, so I must also wonder if my perceptions toward them are not colored by propaganda. You are right, it might appear weak to assume ignorance, or, the lack of epistemic validity, but not according to the Socratic method.
Derek said this on 15 August 2008 at 6:41 pm