Friday, April 18, 2008
The New Nationalism In China -- From Tibet to Taiwan...While Playing Games
It's easy for protests and world-wide whines to emerge when America's freely elected government makes choices – for good or ill – that others don't like. (The entire American congress voted to remove an Iraqi mafioso from power – though some now wish their votes were not part of historical record). Certainly many Americans hated seeing Abu Ghraib photos repeatedly displayed over months by news media and "artists" world-wide (a bit disproportional in pressing a point)
Many Americans disdain actions in Iraq (both unofficial actions and official ones) and openly proclaim their sense of embarrassment or shame over what they see as blasphemy to their anti-war convictions...or posings.
In quite an opposite style of response, It appears that many citizens of China are currently incapable of seeing any flaws in the policies of their unelected dictatorship. To the contrary, a cocky arrogance has become widespread among common citizens in China, in essence telling much of the world to go to hell regarding the heavy hand the communist party has once more brought upon "internal affairs [in Tibet]."*
These are the folks who many in the world would like to see over-take the U.S. in world prestige, influence, and power – a dictatorship who's greatest friends and allies are the world's other ruthless authoritarian enterprises.
There's currently a powerful nationalism emerging in China that sees "China," its citizens, and the Chinese Communist Party as one voice – all lockstep with no dissent even tolerated. At this point, the rest of the world's leaders and citizens still have it within their power to shut down the grandstanding dragon before it reaches the crown it seeks. Unfortunately, we're currently getting the UN approach to the matter, slaps on the wrist – lukewarm statements of "concern" or some threats to merely boycott opening ceremonies at the Olympic games in Beijing.
A dictatorship shouldn't even have been given the prestige and status of being chosen to host the Olympic games in the first place.
The stupid fools among China's population who think the current lot of autocrats that rule China speak for them need to be "slapped on the wrist" a bit harder perhaps – then across the face...hard! I hope the day comes when the victims of China's gulag socialist state can hang the bastards that have ruled far beyond their expiration date.
For many years, the U.S. and its allies sought to remedy the Saddam problem in Iraq, finally acting with the full approval of America's elected congress (how's that for an "illegal" war?). Protest has been pervasive and many American citizens have voiced the variety of opinions that one expects in an open society. (An extreme example of this has been at least ten (!) very biased "anti-war" movies regarding Iraq that embolden the terrorist authoritarian-fascist enemy as the conflict is still occurring). Yet, some would tell us that China's actions in their handling of events in Tibet are no different than those of the U.S. throughout its history.
In China today, an authoritarian clique' has once more roughed up a segment of its own citizens but, unlike the varied responses of citizens in free countries, many in China follow the party-line and further demand a respect unearned and growing influence to a group of thugs that control, coerce, and kill their own citizens.
While symbolic protests over events in Tibet -- this time in favor of freedom vs. dictatorship -- have occurred around the world, the games go on and China now has been given a clear signal as to what they may do in Taiwan. Again, thousands may die because some fools wanted – short term – "peace."
Giving dictatorships a pass is always a bad idea and one that others come to eventually regret.
Too bad.
*I fully realize that the left accuses the U.S. of this very style of arrogance but it just isn't so. The U.S. and several of its allies pleaded and "talked" for years regarding the Hussein problem in Iraq with no results. When the time came to choose action or more useless talk (how many "resolutions" does one need before acting?), the U.S. gave the Iraqi dictator choices in how to cooperate or face war – Iraq chose war, and got it. There isn't a single country in the world that can't emphatically say "no!" to the U.S and they often do just that. France and Germany can hardly say they were coerced into war in Iraq by an arrogant America. They simply sided with the dictator – as they so often do – and held their ground while seeking to sway others to their view (some oil for food program money certainly helped to seal the deal).
