May 2 fiasco in Hong Kong

Today is Apr 30. May 2 is still in future. However, what is going to happen on that day in Hong Kong is gonna be a good show with inappropriate performers. It is a classic case of 'fiasco'. According to Wiki, a 'fiasco' is a complete or humiliating failure. I think this description is a fit for such a ridiculous event in the territory.

32.5% of 120 selected runners to carry the torch are from politics or business, who has no direct relationship with sports. Though people in Hong Kong are not keen into sports (except being spectators or participants in betting), other media already nominate some current or retired athletes who have better representation than those 32.5%.

I think any sane folk who has an objective mind and gut should stay away from being part of such fiasco on May 2. Nough said!

What's Going on?

Since I was in like ten years old, I start reading newspaper. As it is quite natural for a kid to want to explore what is going on in the world beside my day-to-day routine life as a schoolkid. TV was another medium, I would be able to see documentaries and news about other places, and hear comments from those so-called experts/adults about issues. Certainly, in these days, internet helps a lot. Thank God for internet. Now, we can have news and commentary real-time from multi-dimension which is very exciting. Though I get older, my passion to learn what’s going on in the world or in the society in general has not diminished at all. That’s why I still try to squeeze about an hour a day to surf the net to read news that I’m interested in and read blogs from some favor bloggers. Though I don’t know them in person, reading their comments do make me feel connected to their thoughts somehow.

The more I learn what’s going on through different channels and read the comments from different people, the more I appreciate the freedom of speech and the more objective that I can be in terms of viewing issues from various angles. That is really a serious challenge to general traditional journalism and the opinions of some ‘handy’ experts on issues. If not for the media, you would not be able to tell how stupid, naïve and ridiculous of some ‘power’ figures in our society:
You can see how those government officials who have power, but no sense in logic.
You can see how those politicians who can voice to the public but no gut.
You can see how those tycoons who have money, but no moral.
You can see how those celebrities who have looks but no brain.
And thank God to internet, you can see those invisible or weak in the society have no representative in traditional media. That really opens our eyes.

I’m not sure either Confucius or LaoTze has said something like:
If you read but don’t think, it is a waste of time.
If you think but don’t read, you are dangerous.

Today, I think many folks how have access to so much information, but either they don’t read or they don’t filter their incoming information. They can’t tell the difference between voice and noise. They just listen to those speak the loudest and adopt that as the right message. Then, they follow and spread that noise……I think that is really sad and dangerous.

Sharing of message / knowledge via internet is such a wonder these days. Wikipedia is a remarkable tool. Youtube is fun and informational. IM is handy. However, when people use the net to incite destructive acts, the effect could be enormous. I’m not suggesting anything new here. I just think people should stop and take a moment to think before doing or saying anything that can affect others.

"M" shape society

Similar to Japan, Hong Kong is becoming a 'M' shape society, according to the Japanese Sociologist 大前研一 Kenichi Ohmae. Namely, the population of the riches and the poors are expanding while the middle class is shrinking. Certainly, it depends on how you define who are the middle class. Also, the other phenomena is that the upward mobility of middle class is diminishing, that's why the poors are growing.

Last night I watch a program in local TV which is called 'The story of a million'. It is about the livelihood of poor people who are accounted for 1/5 of the population here. I love to read news and quite sensible to what's going on the in society, though I'm kinda passive in doing/expressing anything about any social cause. Thus, the miserable lives that those poor people are living in are not something that I've unheard of before. The program has 5 episodes and the one showed last night was just a preview of the rest. The scene that was most vivid to me was about a kid who used to be very active and cheerful, described by her mom, became introvert and dares not to ask anything anymore as she grows older. Cos, whatever she asked, she was not gonna get it. In order to avoid being disappointed, she stayed away from asking for anything. I think that's very sad, she is still a kid.

I think it is very tough for being kids these days, actually it applies to adults as well. In our materialistic society, everything is about money, everything has a price. Even some intangible things like art, love, happiness, hope, shame, etc. are all being measured and expressed with a price tag. How to teach kid about value become so hard to the parents! My wife and I went to a department store at lunch time today to look for stuff for our boy. She came across a brand named necking that she wanted to buy. I ended up convinced her to buy a cheaper one which also look pretty. Cos, our boy of seven months old wouldn't know it is a branded good or not. It is up for the adult to judge subjectively. Brand name stuff has value, but whether it is justified for anyone is different story. There are so much packaging, branding, marketing that fill up the media and in the marketplace which I think many of them are scams to make money off people and they are wasting natural resources as well.

I hope our family's living standard won't slide down to become as poor as those folks in the TV show that I mentioned. However, sometimes you never know...

Can insurance guarantee and compensate in case of accidents or illness that we may encounter in future?

Would any kind of natural disasters can affect us?

Would any bad thing happen to our other family members?

What about job security? There is no such thing this days....

So, there is so much unknowns that I just don't feel secure financially to deal with those possibilities. Therefore, investing, savings and selective spending are all I'm trying to do, though I have to admit that there is so much to learn and to improve on all those fronts. Anyway, to manage the life of oneself is tough enough, let alone about a family of members who have different views on things. How much you can 'shape' your kid to think certain way is no guarantee neither. We can only do so much........

My Most Favorite and Least Favorite Foods

As Captioned.
Favorites:
Sushi - Toro, Salmon, Eels, Softshell crabs, crabs
Pizza and Breads - any kinds
Pastas and Lasanga - any kinds, but more cheese please
Dairy Products - Parmasen cheese, soft cream cheese, 2% milk, yogurt of any kinds.
Noodles - any kinds, except 'lai fun'
Rice - Jasimine, Thai
Seafoods - fish, shrimps, crabs, shellfishs, octupus, squlids, etc
Veggies - any kinds, particularly carrots, 'sai guo', bean spouts, mushooms or all kinds, tofu, etc.
Meat - beef, pork, lamb, chicken, ducks, hams, all are fine
Ice-creams - love those with nuts and grapes, e.g. Haggen Daz's Rum Raisien. Also, green tea, and berries
Desserts - pies, tarts, cakes, etc. as long as it is not too sweet. Love blueberry cheese cakes, and tiramisu, and apple pies.
Fruits - almost any kinds. Orange, apples, banana, water-melons, 'san joke', any type of berries.
Soups - Clam chowder. All types of Chinese soups.
Beers - Asahi, Kirin, Coronna
Eggs - from chicken and duck
Dim sums - buns and dumplings

Foods that I will not pick if there is alternative:
Noodles - 'lai fun'
Rice - boiled Uncle Ben
Soda
Most candies, colorful snacks with perservatives.
Spam
Canned veggies
Snakes

Foods that I don't eat:
Dairy Products - blue cheese, can't stand the taste.
Meat - frogs, rabbit, wild animals of all kinds, chicken or duck feets, and fatty stuffs and internal organs.
Fruits - 'Lau lin'
Veggie - 'smelly tofu'
Anything that is rotten, expired, stink, unhealthy.
Tobacco of any kinds

Self Motivation

Lately, I've trouble to motiviate myself to do things that I want to do. Handy excuses like "I'm tired", "I still can wait, it is not important now", "I'm busy with this and that", etc, are being used by the lazy side of mine to stop me from doing things. I think doing excercise is a way to relax my mind to collect thoughts and get my 'engine' starts. However, I barely got to do that. I think I'm gonna make up my mind to do that this weekend, like having a hour of walking, or maybe a light jog in the morning. Hopefully that would work. Too bad that the weather forecast is not good this weekend, but.......should I be stopped by wind and rain?..... I guess not. Let's see if I can do that.

Tibet Issue

The following article is one of the best out there in the web that provide an objective view and analysis of the issue.

梁文道：為西藏問題尋找最大公約數——期待民族的和解（原刊於香港「明報」筆陣）
一
2006 年，達賴喇嘛在印度舉行時輪金剛灌頂法會，他在會上批評當今藏人喜好皮草的虛華作風不僅庸俗，而且有違佛教義理。幾天之後，西藏各地就有人紛紛公開焚燒價格高昂的豹皮外衣狐帽子。當地官員大為震怒，認為這是以「達賴喇嘛為首的藏獨分子的精心運作」，然後下令藏人要重新穿上皮衣，因為它們明瞭黨的德政使大家過上了好日子，甚至以穿不穿戴皮草來檢大家的「政治覺悟」（關於這次事件的詳情，可以參見西藏作家唯色的《看不見的西藏》）。

這樁近乎鬧劇的事件可以說明兩個問題：一是北京為何在國際民間外交的戰場上佔不去達蘭薩拉的上風，二是流亡在外的達賴喇嘛為什麼在藏人心目中仍然享有如此巨大的影響力。

先談第一點。現在恐怕沒有任何一個國家膽敢得罪中國，承認西藏流亡政府的地位。但是在民間社會的層面上，情形就完全不同了。對大部分西方人而言，達賴喇嘛甚至可能是位比現任教宗本篤十六世還要受歡迎的宗教領袖。達賴喇嘛極少談及本篤十六世關心的墮胎和「性濫」等很容易被人批為保守的議題，他的主題一直是和平、寬容、理解和慈悲，所以就算不能贏得所有人的支持，至少也沒有多少人會對他有惡感。

為什麼每次西藏出事，每次有藏獨的集會遊行，我們都會看見一大群演員、名流、作家和知識分子站出來支持他們？相反地，支持中國政府的「國際友人」這時都到哪去了呢？對很多人來說，達賴喇嘛代表了一套美善而完整的價值觀，他對西藏的種種訴求則符合了當今人權觀念的整個論述。再赤裸點說，大家會覺得聲援達賴喇嘛是為了「義」，給中國面子反對分裂則是為了「利」。

再也沒有比06 年「皮草事件」更好的例子了。達賴喇嘛的主張不只出自慈悲，更與流行的動物權益運動若合符節，國際進步青年聞之莫不稱善。反過來看，西藏地方官員竟然為了抵制達賴喇嘛的影響，不惜違反世界潮流和保護野生動物的國家方針，要求藏民重新披上動物的皮毛。其間高下實不可以道計。

二
比起這點，第二個問題或許更令北京憂心。達賴喇嘛人在印度 50 年，其一言一行在藏區竟然還有如斯巨大的影響力，原因究竟何在？近日的藏區紛亂，官方一直強調是「達賴集團」在幕後精心策劃出來的，我以為這個說法必須好好分析。首先，所謂「達賴集團」指的其實不一定是達賴本人。凡對西藏問題略有所知者，都知道「西藏青年大會」才是流亡西藏人中的激進派，他們的勢力龐大網絡周全，雖然奉達賴喇嘛為尊，但也公開批評過達賴的非暴力主張，二者潛存矛盾。我們目前雖然沒有足夠資訊研判內情，但最近的事件卻不一定就是達賴本人指揮煽動。反過來看，達賴那番若藏人暴力活動持續他就要退位的聲明，則有可能是對「西藏青年大會」等激進派的反制施壓。

然而，不管有沒有人策動藏人上街，也不管策動者是誰，中國政府首先該問的是何以它在過去數十年來投入了大量的人力財力，使西藏年均GDP 每年皆有超過10%的增長，竟還有許多藏人深懷怨憤，隨時就能人手一面「雪山獅子旗」呢？以我個人所見，這甚至是不少漢族知識分子都感到難以理解的，他們有的相信官方主流論述，認為共產黨把藏人從神權統治下的農奴制解放了出來；有的則覺得漢地各省長期以來勒緊自己的褲帶對西藏施行慷慨的「對口援助」，藏民卻毫不領情，一翻臉就不認人，甚是奇怪。

說起來，西藏問題真是一團迷霧，只要你朝它多走一步，你就會發現原來所相信的任何一種簡單立場都能碰上理據十足的反駁。不只現在的西方媒體造假與中國傳媒監控各惹嫌疑，歷史上的詭局謎團更是令人眼花撩亂。如果你認為「自古以來」，西藏就是中國的一部分；你將會發現要花很多時間去解釋古代宗主國對藩屬的關為什麼等同於現代民族國家和它的轄下省份（越南反而確曾是中華王朝的一省）。反過來說，如果你相信在「中國入侵」之前，西藏是片連丁點暴力都不可能發生的和平淨土；那麼你又該如何理解14 任達賴喇嘛頭只有3 位順利活到成年的事實呢？假如你覺得文革對西藏的破壞是不可饒恕的，你或許應該知道當年打砸佛寺佛像的主力之一竟然是藏人。假如你認為中央對西藏的宗教自由已經足夠寬容，甚至許流亡在外的眾多上師返鄉建寺（最有名的當屬頂果欽哲法王）；你可能也曉得現在的西藏小學生是連隨身護符也不帶的。

關於西藏的歷史，北京和達蘭薩拉各有一套說法。前者強調老西藏是塊大部分人充當農奴的黑暗土地，是共產黨一手把它帶進了光明的現代社會。後者則將西藏描繪為一個牧歌般的和平桃源，沒有爭戰只有靈性，是無神論的共產黨摧毀了這一切。

平心而論，兩者都各有偏頗，不足為信。西藏確曾是個農奴社會，1951 年前，光是三大領主經營的莊園竟然就佔了全藏可耕地的62%，其中又有37%為寺院所有。大部分平民都要在耕作之餘替領主服終身勞役。不過這些農奴的實況遠非中文的「奴」字所能概括，雖然身份是「奴」，但他們的物質生活卻不一定很差，所以在「劃成分」時才會出現了「富裕農奴」這麼古怪的類別。西藏確實也是個佛國，出家人所佔的人口比例舉世罕見。只不過和任何俗世社會一樣，以前的西藏也少不了各種勾心鬥角、貪污暴政甚至高層僧侶間的政治暗殺，與完美的世外桃源相去甚遠（詳見王力雄《天葬》、Melvyn Goldstein 的經典巨著《A History of Modern Tibet 1913-1951》（中譯《喇嘛王國的覆滅》） 及《The Snow Lion and the Dragon: China,Tibet and the Dalai Lama》）。

三
在這種種互相突的據和理論之上，任何一方要是堅持自己的認知來決定行動方向，其實都是在玩一場後果難斷的賭局。為什麼明明有那麼多線索顯示與達賴喇嘛漸行漸遠的「西藏青年大會」才是騷亂主謀，中央政府仍然堅持要把達賴拉下水呢？為什麼中央不肯聽陳思這些獨立學者的意見，趁並不堅持獨立而且態度溫和的達賴喇嘛圓寂前與他對話呢？

這就是中國政府的賭局了。大家都曉得，就算達賴在海外轉世，一個幼年的靈童也起不了什麼作用。近日，十七世大寶法王將要接下藏人精神領袖位置的傳聞甚囂塵上，據之一是他剛剛才公開向藏傳佛教各派上師致以由「利美運動」留下來的請安禱文，大有團結各派的意思。可是，即便尊貴如他，恐怕也代替不了達賴喇嘛在藏民與世界各地支持者心目中的地位。沒錯，達賴一走，中國就會少掉一個難以應付的對手，但是激進的「藏青會」豈不也是會趁勢崛起？各種極端的主張和暴力的手段豈不將如脫韁野馬般地蜂擁四起？

然而，對中國政府而言，這或許也是正中下懷的好事，因為整個海外西藏流亡政府運動將會名正言順地轉變成人人得而誅之的恐怖分子，昔日的和平宗教色彩將因此一掃而空。有人可能會擔憂那些恐怖活動帶來的破壞和犧牲，不過，沒有風險又怎能叫做賭局呢？更詭異的是流亡西藏運動一旦走上了暴力路線，本來隱匿的所謂「外國勢力」也會變得非常尷尬，他們願不願意直接敵對中國，支持一個公開放棄非暴力主義的組織呢？可見中國政府鷹派對待達賴的拖延手法其實不是外間所以為的愚蠢盲目，反而是相當聰明的。最大的問題只是中國要付出多大的代價呢？大家是否都做好了長期武裝抗爭和剛性鎮壓的準備呢？所有平民百姓知不知道以後的日子可能要在惶恐中度過呢？因為除了「疆獨」，日後或許會多出一批前所未見的劫機犯。

就算中國政府預備好了硬性的手段，面對藏人普遍的忿恨不滿；它既不可能把他們統統都蒸發掉，也不可能成功地按照自己幾十年來的邏輯，將「極少數的藏獨分子」和「絕大多數的愛國藏胞」完全分隔。另一方面，即便流亡海外的西藏獨立運動真的完成了最不可能的夢想，爭得西藏獨立；他們也不得不面對西藏境內早已住上了許多漢人和回民的現實，難道你能強迫他們全部離開嗎？更不用提四川、甘肅、青海、內蒙古等地藏區多民族混合的局面了。所以，無論你抱持何種政治立場，你也不能不認真對待漢藏等民族間日後相處的問題。於是在徹底壓抑西藏主體性與完全獨立這兩個各走極端的方向之間，我們至少就可以找到一個最起碼的共通點，最大的公約數了，那就是真正的民族和解。

四
然而中國政府處理西藏問題的大方向卻簡單得出奇，那就是把一切責任都往達賴喇嘛身上推。其目的無非就是要在達賴在世的時候把他塑造成最大對手，以後就更能充分地矮化或許會成為暴力組織的其他激進派系了。於是各級官員才會把話說得一個比一個還狠，例如公安部長孟建柱上周入藏視察時就曾放言「達賴不配做一個佛教徒」。從戰術邏輯看來，這番話是有的放矢；但是聽在藏人和藏傳佛教徒耳中，它無異於對著一群天主教徒指斥教宗不配當天主教徒，你猜他們會做何感想呢？要知道許多藏人在家私藏達賴玉照早已是公開的秘密；如果真心追求西藏問題的順利解決，維護國家領土的完整，政府豈能如此漠視藏人的感受，為了一時戰術上的功效犧牲全盤戰略的局，屢屢辱罵藏人的精神領袖呢？難道他們不知道這種做法只會迫使許多藏人更加陽奉陰違，甚至增加他們的離心嗎？

1998 年，時任國家主席江澤民曾經公開對著來訪的美國總統克林頓說過這樣的話：「我去年訪美的時候，也包括到歐洲的一些國家，我發現許多人教育水平很高，知識水平都很高，可是他們還是很相信喇嘛教的教義」。他的意思再明顯不過：「喇嘛教」如此愚昧落後，你們這些文明開化的西方人怎麼還要信它呢？無論從任何標準來看，這都是番令人震驚的言論。一位國家元首怎能如此公開侮辱國內一支主要少數民族的信仰呢？我們可以想像克林頓會說猶他州州民教育水平這麼高，還要相信摩門教真奇怪嗎？

如果連整個國家的領導人也是如此，其餘更是思過半矣。直到近年為止，隨便翻翻《西藏日報》，我們還會看見如下觀點：「西藏由於受到歷史地理等諸多因素的制約，經濟、社會發展水平還相對落後，從封建農奴社會遺留下來的迷信、愚昧、非科學的東西至今還禁錮廣大農牧民群眾的思想」。令人感慨的是，除了政府和官方媒體之外，就連一些知識分子也就著最近的事件中動輒放言「藏人的民族性天真淳，很容易受人迷惑」。即便對西藏問題一向開明中肯的民間學者王力雄也有他的盲點，他除了曾用「喇嘛教」這個充滿漢地佛教偏見的稱謂指稱藏傳佛教或藏人喜用的「金剛乘」之外，也不能免俗地以簡單的環境決定論去說明藏人對宗教的渴求。

五
走筆至此，我們不難發現所謂西藏問題其實有一半是漢人自己的問題。從在上位者一直到民間百姓，不只對西藏的民情文化沒有起碼的認識和尊重，更對雜纖細的民族問題毫不敏感。進而言之，中華人民共和國雖說是多民族國家，但我們的少數民族政策卻從來都是不完整的，一是因為我們只是單向地把它看成是對少數民族做工作，卻從未反省漢人為主的主要族群該如何與其他民族共存；二是這些政策的圍相當狹隘，沒有把民族視野恰當地貫注在其他政策之內。

且以文革遺產的清理為例。根據班禪喇嘛早在文革爆發前4 年向中央委員會遞交的「七萬言意見書」： 「民改前的西藏有大、中、小寺廟2500 餘座，而民改後由政府留下來的僅只有70 多座，減少了97%多，由於大部分寺廟沒人居住，所以大經堂等神殿僧捨無人管，人為的和非人為的損害，破壞巨大，淪於已倒塌和正在倒塌的境地」。到了文革那十年，僧人被迫還俗，佛寺遭到洗劫的慘狀就更是變本加厲了。有些論者承認這種種做為對西藏造成的災害確實很巨大，但轉頭卻說不只西藏，「那十年全國各地一樣受害」，言下之意是大伙過去都遭殃了，你們藏人不該老拿這些往事出來說三道四。這就是對民族問題不敏感的絕佳例子了，他們似乎完全不明白同樣是文革，對漢人而言或許是自己人斗自己人，但到了西藏卻是你們漢人帶頭來搞我們西藏人了。所以在處理這些歷史傷痕的時候，政府應該格外小心，不能只是出錢修復廟宇，甚至還要採取比在漢地更徹地的解決方案（例如查明歷史真相和道歉），方能締造民族和解的基礎。

比起雖有魁北克問題但大體上和平的加拿大，中國其實一直沒有認真實行過多元文化的路線。首先，我們要知道所謂的「普通話」其實就是現代漢語。當許多官員其談西藏的教育普及做得如何之好的時候，大概沒有想過對藏族青少年來講，他們正在學著掌握一種非母語，且要用它為工具和來自漢地的同齡人競逐大學的入學機會以及政府公職，其間的差異足以造成重點大學藏人入學率偏低的情形。

假如許用藏文考高考的想法太過不切實際，讓各地中學開設藏語和維吾爾語選修班也十分異想天開的話，我們能不能審視一下現有的教材內容呢？翻翻歷史課本，身為多民族共存的現代國家，我們念的卻還是唐宋元明的王朝世系，那你要置吐蕃王國於何地呢？番邦嗎？同樣地，農新年是法定假期，那麼藏新年呢？就算不用全國放假，漢人學子也該學點藏和回的基本紀年知識吧。

真正完整的民族政策，不可能只是保障各少數民族在自己居住地內的傳統文化和權益，更不可以只是讓他們學融入漢人定義的「中華文化」；而是要讓人口佔多數的漢人也學懂其他民族的文化傳統，平等地對待其他民族。

六
我在電視上看見一些青年僧人也參與了近月的事件，甚至還拿起了石塊和棍棒……他們的憤怒我只能盡量體會。現謹摘抄13 世紀偉大的成就者嘉瑟．戊初．東美〈菩薩行三十七頌〉片段如下，祈願藏漢的真正和解：

「即使有人用各種難聽的話貶損我，並且在千萬個世界中到處張揚，出於慈悲，我讚美這個人的功德，乃是菩薩的修行。」

「在大型集會之中，某人用侮辱的語言揭露我隱藏的缺陷，恭敬地向他行禮，視其為法友，乃是菩薩的修行。」

「被我視如己出地來關愛的人待我為仇敵，如母親愛生病的孩子一般更加愛他，乃是菩薩的修行。」

「如果有人即將斬下我的頭，即使我沒有絲毫過錯，透過悲心的力量，擔負他所有的惡業，乃是菩薩的修行。」

Western Hypocrisy

I found this article in the web that I think it is really good to share with 'few' readers of my blog:

日本時報網3月21日文章 原題：西藏和奧運
作者 澳大利亞前外交官格雷戈裡·克拉克

近來一些西方國家在拉薩暴力事件等問題上對中國橫加指責，這是一種虛偽的兩面手法。

中國政府處理拉薩暴力事件的方式，即便是再加上其他所謂的過失——處理達爾富爾、污染及人權等問題的方式，可以成為呼籲抵制今夏北京奧運會的正當利益嗎？抵制奧運會是一件粗陋的、有失準星的武器。一些國家曾以蘇聯入侵阿富汗為由抵制1980年的莫斯科奧運會，而包括英國在內的西方國家如今也介入了阿富汗，會有人以此為由抵制2012年的倫敦奧運會嗎？不大可能。


其他針對中國的指責大多也伴有偽善，以達爾富爾問題為例，西方指責中國沒有進行政治干預及向蘇丹政府出售武器，但不干涉他國內部事務一度曾是西方標榜的原則，而中國如今卻因遵守這一原則而遭受指責；向出於內亂的國家的政府出售武器則一直就是西方的典範作為。

中國被批評是全球排污大國及稀缺資源消費大國，但有一點幾乎完全被忽略了：中國在應對這兩個問題方面的作為要遠遠大於其他國家，這就是計劃生育政策。倘若沒有這個政策，中國如今可能要額外負擔3億到4億人的衣食住行，而這一數字比西歐國家的人口總和還要多，這樣一來全球的資源供應和環境可能要不堪重負。然而，一些西方國家的保守派卻視計劃生育政策為中國的另一劣跡。與此同時，中國為減少對煤炭的依賴而增加核能發電和水力發電的做法也受到西方反核、反水壩人士的批評。好像中國不管做什麼都不對。

http://bbs.ecust.edu.cn/viewthread.php?tid=110047

原文

Tibet and Olympic Games

By GREGORY CLARK

Events in Tibet have turned ugly. Once again we see the harm caused by Beijing's heavy-handed bureaucracy, and its panicky, untrained soldiers used for crowd control. But even when combined with all of Beijing's other alleged sins — Darfur, pollution, human rights and other issues — does Tibet justify the calls for a boycott of Beijing's planned Olympic Games later this year?

Olympic boycotts are a clumsy and biased weapon. Moscow had its 1980 Olympics boycotted because of its intervention in Afghanistan. But the Western, including British, intervention today in Afghanistan, while weaker in its ferocity, is almost identical in its motives — support for an unstable government with idealistic goals but unable to cope with domestic insurgents. Would anyone use that to boycott the planned London Olympics? Hardly.
Hypocrisy taints most of the other accusations against Beijing. Take Darfur, for example. Beijing is criticized for weapons sales to a Sudanese government guilty of assisting attacks on defenseless villagers, and refusing to intervene politically to help prevent those attacks. Yet nonintervention in the affairs of other nations was once a proudly proclaimed Western principle, aimed to end all wars in the 20th century. Now China is criticized for obeying that principle.

As for selling weapons to governments behaving atrociously against their own peoples, that has long been standard Western behavior. During the East Timor, Papua and Aceh atrocities in Indonesia, Britain was busily selling Jakarta the military aircraft it wanted. The handful of brave British women who tried physically to prevent those sales were jailed. Few complained.

Western armies are also known to attack defenseless villagers at times, as in Indochina before, and now in Iraq and Afghanistan. True, those armies can claim they only attack people supporting the civil-war enemy, but the Sudan government can say exactly the same over Darfur. The cruelties of its attacks there have yet to match the defoliation and free-fire zone tactics of the United States in Indochina. Of all the Western nations, only the Scandinavians at the time had the moral courage to halt arms sales to the U.S. in protest.
China is criticized as the great global polluter and user of scarce resources. But in one almost completely overlooked respect it has done far more than any of the rest of us to overcome both problems. This is its one-child policy. If not for that policy, China today would have to feed, clothe and accommodate an estimated extra 300 million to 400 million people — more than the entire population of Western Europe. The strain on world resource supplies and the environment would have been unbearable.

But to do this Beijing has had to court severe unpopularity at home. And it now has to live with two unfortunate results — a serious male-female population imbalance and rapid aging of the population. No one thanks Beijing for making these sacrifices. On the contrary. Some Western conservatives see the one-child policy as yet another Beijing evil.
Meanwhile, Beijing's impressive efforts to increase nuclear and hydro-power and so reduce dependence on polluting coal are criticized by our Western antinuclear, antidam progressives. China, it seems, just can't win, no matter what it does. It is the six-ton elephant that everyone likes to bash.

Similarly with many other criticisms. Beijing should admit that policy mistakes were made in Tibet in the 1960s, and that the Han Chinese immigration there since has caused frictions. For cultural reasons Chinese do not blend easily with other peoples. Resentments flare up easily, as we saw before in the anti-Chinese riots of Malaysia and Indonesia.

But Beijing can also point out that some of its early troubles could have been avoided if the CIA and New Delhi hawks had not set out to instigate the original 1959 Tibetan rebellion. As for Tibetan independence, people forget that the strongest opponent was the Western-backed Nationalist Chinese government that ended up in Taiwan. Beijing simply inherited that Western-approved situation.

Hypocrisy dogs the criticisms of China over democracy and human rights also. China at least goes through the motions of providing trials and prison sentences for the occasional activist dissident it sees as dangerous. Nonactivists are largely ignored.


What were the U.S. and some of its friends doing when Latin American governments of the 1970s were arbitrarily arresting and torturing dissidents in the tens of thousands and throwing their broken bodies into the ocean or unmarked graves? Almost nothing. Their agents were busy providing lists of more dissidents to be tracked down.

The U.S. has an impressive track record of supporting dictatorships that it sees as friendly even if they suppress human rights, and working to overthrow democratically elected governments if it sees them as unfriendly.

Beijing has already moved to introduce democracy at the grassroots level. It plans to go further up, but there are limits. Does anyone imagine, for example, that its unpopular one-child policy would survive if China had free national elections?

Singapore is another Sinitic culture society that believes in a strong semi-autocratic government able to impose unpopular but needed policies as preferable to the Western free democratic model. Few see Singapore as the epitome of all undemocratic evil.

I do not want to whitewash all that Beijing does. During the Cultural Revolution and "ping-pong diplomacy" periods of the early '70s, I saw at close quarters how unpleasant and unreasonable its officials can be. But you judge a nation by the direction in which it is traveling, not by the road bumps. And China is clearly moving in a direction of very considerable promise to us all. The Olympics, like ping-pong diplomacy, will push China further in that direction.

Gregory Clark was formerly China desk officer in the Australian Department of External Affairs, and is now vice president of Akita International University. A Japanese translation of this article will appear on: www.gregoryclark.net.

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20080321gc.html

SONG OF SWAN

Creation

Chinese CG:气韵生动 (English Title: The Way )

Very cool video!

Introspection

Everyone has both the introvert and extrovert sides. When I am in my introvert mode, I like to think, to dream, or to let my mind drifting from idea to idea in a flow. When I was younger, I did that a lot, perhaps it was because I had more than ample of time being by myself. Besides regular day to day contact with people, I spent quite a bit of time enjoying hobbies that I could do alone at my own pace anytime I chose. Other than those thinking, dreaming and mind-drifting, one thing that I did quite often was introspection. I think that is a key to the mental growth of a person.

Introspection is to go over in my mind what I'd done and said in a period of time. Of course, we won't remember everything, but it is useful to examine the highlights of things that I did and said, in order to identify any mistake. The goal is simple, try not to do that again. One thing that I hate the most is to regret. Introspection is being used to prevent regret to happen. However, I think that I've done my introspection myself since I got married. Ha, some readers of this blog will think that it means that I may find out I would regret to be married! Nah...I don't think so!

It is because I've not been managed my time well since I got married, especially now when I became a dad. I really struggle with my personal time management. I already did less than what I wanna do, because I'm not myself anymore, I'm the husband of a woman and a dad of a kid. They are my priorities, and they are linked together most of the time. So, I just don't have much time to sitback, relax, and do some introspection myself. I used to do that before I slept, or during shower. I didn't why I just haven't done that much in the past 2 years or so. Well, don't get me wrong that I do sleep and take shower.

This morning before breakfast, I suddenly started to introspect for 2 minutes while I was in the shower. The feeling was so good that I think it kinda help me to kick start of today. Maybe because I just having done that for too long. I suddenly urge to do that again. In my personal history, I usually did introspection when I was sad, confused, helpless, or gonna make some major decisions. I didn't do that often out of the blue. So, that's why this morning's experience is kinda weird. My introspection mode kicked in automatically. I think that maybe my subconsciousness was trying to warn me to change what I've been doing. I think I need to introspect again tonight. I'm sure some thoughts or motivation will come out as a result. I'm looking forward to that.....is that weird that it sounds like I need to make a self-appointment to think?

Suicide (reprise)

Five years ago today, a pop singer jumped off from the 24th floor of Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Central Hong Kong. His name is Leslie Cheung. For what kind of person he is, about his history and his career, they can certainly be found in details in the web. I’m not gonna elaborate here. My personal feeling toward this artist is mixed. I really appreciate his performance on stage or on films. I also have many of his CDs and listen to his songs on my iPod every now and then. However, I’ve uneasy feeling towards his death as a result of suicide. Personally, I’ve a very negative feeling of the act of committing suicide.

I always think that life is fragile from the perspective on a macro scale, but life is tough and valuable on personal level. In our nature, animals do whatever they could to try to survive. I don’t think human being behaved anyway different until we have civilization. In our human history, many important people were honor, aside for what they did when they were alive, but also for what they tried to do that relate to their deaths. Some of them committed extremely dangerous acts. We certainly don’t know their mental state when they prepared to do what they did. Namely, did they know that they were gonna die for sure if they do certain things. However, I think there is a difference between those actually doing something great and dangerous, and they end up dead, and someone killed themselves just simply for defending a noble cause. Regardless, I always think that unless you try to save others’ lives, it is not worthy to put yourself into a life-threatening situation if there are alternatives. For an example, if a regular folk saved a kid from a hitting by a car on the street. He ends up dead but the kid is saved. He is hero to me. If he is saving many people in an extreme situation and he ends up dead. He is a martyr. On the other hand, if he is policeman, a fireman, or a soldier, he should be commemorated and honored, but his death is a result of performing his duty which is subjected to the inherited risk. Other than those situations, killing oneself should be not encouraged or honored in any form.

I’m not against some so-called ‘assisted suicide’ by doctors if it is agreed by the patient, the medical authority and the patient’s family to some extent. I think it should be available as a choice legally, but it should not be encouraged. In other cases, any folks that kill themselves, I think that they are making the wrong choice though they might disagree. There is always ‘other’ ways in life. No matter how bad the situation is, if someone just take a deep breath, step back and look around, he should see there are choices. That’s what a person who feels being push to a corner should do.

It is too bad that Leslie did get timely assistance when he needed the most. I always think that he is a great entertainer. He should be remembered for his songs, movies, performance, etc...except for his last art.