User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 121

  1. #101
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cloud View Post
    To say Mao is a bad leader is stupid....
    Depends upon your criteria, I suppose; any "leader" that has to resort to gestapo tactics in order to lead, and whose leadership produced no apparent results other than entrenched power is automatically a bad leader in my book-I'm fully prepared to admit that Mao was very good at what he did, just as Hitler was very good at making stirring speeches to receptive audiences.

    I never claimed Chiang was a democrat (he was brutal, corrupt, and authoritarian); I simply noted that economic development accompanied his rule in Taiwan, and that democratization eventually came about. Derogatively referring to him as a "fascist" seems more than a little ironic coming from someone who praises someone like Mao because he made China "unified" and "strong."

    Now, pardon me while I laugh at the claim that Mainland China is as prosperous as Taiwan....portraying Shanghai as indicative of most of China is about like portraying Addis Ababa as indicative of most of Ethiopia.

  2. #102
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cloud View Post
    Anyway, about Mao, like violence said, China would have slip into more anarchy and violence if it wasn't because of Mao. Mao made some big mistakes, but he did put the country back into order.
    An adequate acquaintanceship with the history eludes me, so I can't comment on the past times too well, but if we're talking legacies, then I'll go along with the idea the Commies under Mao unified the country. I have to think that the desire was there before they showed up, though. When they started out they had the popular support, after all, yeah? And then, time wore on. And whatever they were at the beginning, they have over the last fifty years attached themselves with new words and old ideas to something that was Chinese to begin with. I could be really wrong about that, but it really does seem like, for want of a better phrase, they're Commies with Confucian characteristics, and that's how they survived outliving their popular support.

    And for those points, we should bear in mind that the Commies also battered the vitality and substance out of Confucianism, and what lives on now are such warped and paraplegic essentials as stayed in the minds and hearts of the people who lived through all that crap.

    One alt-view of history suggests that whatever else Mao did at the beginning, he also slowed down the middle. And how could he not, yeah? Unless I read my ideologically-biased histories wrong, Mao initiated the Cultural Revolution as a power play.

    China was much better shape against the world in the 1950's than it was in Qing dynasty, where it was being beatened and raped and technologically inferior. And Mao laid the foundation of a strong modern state which made economic progress possible.
    And see, the "beaten" and "raped" and "strong" and "inferrior" and the "progress" and the "development" words... they're all tags for something else, and if someone would properly spell out what they mean, instead of plunging them into international waters as if they told truths, then we'd have a, maybe even substantial, impression of a Chinese worldview.

    There's a reason Chinese speak as they do about colonial and world war histories, isn't there. And, just like any national speaking words on any history of their nation, the things they say are, to put it mildly, interpretations. National identity does not arrive from historical fact, but from reaction to historical fact.

    Not denying historical fact. (One of the ugliest, most horrible things I ever saw on TV was a documentary about several Japanese soldiers, now old men, who travelled their country telling their war stories--and those war stories were the foulest, most inhuman barbarities I have ever seen a sane man recall--I was appalled and horrified watching this show, and only found out later that these men were repatriated, successfully re-educated POWs from Chinese and Russian prisons, and they travelled Japan to tell their stories because history seemed to have faded in the minds of the young.) But I am asserting that Chinese are not benign observers of their own history. What do Chinese bring to the interpreting table, and why? (And I'm really hoping whatever the answer, it is older than 60 years, however entangled with Communist mysticism it may be.)
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  3. #103
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Now, pardon me while I laugh at the claim that Mainland China is as prosperous as Taiwan....portraying Shanghai as indicative of most of China is about like portraying Addis Ababa as indicative of most of Ethiopia.
    And indeed you can laugh:

    Shanghai GDP is approximately of $197 billion, for 19 million inhabitants (2008).

    Taiwan GDP is approximately of $696 billion, for 23 million inhabitants (2007).

    Taiwan GDP per capita is approximately 10 times higher than the one of Mainland China (including Shanghai and Hong Kong).

    Plus Taiwan is a real democracy with almost no censorship in the medias (According to the NGO Reporters without borders, freedom of speech in Taiwanese medias were more or less at the same level than in the USA [2008]. It ranked 36 out of 173, Singapore 144 out of 173, and of course, China was 167 out of 173).
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  4. #104
    Senior Member Dooraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTp
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    Read, "The Fabrication of Aboriginal History", by Keith Windshuttle. The third volume is coming out today.

    Should you read, "The Fabrication of Aboriginal History", you will have no need to repeat the fabrication here.
    So I read the summary of his book, which is to say quite good. But he only argues that the number of reports of the violence in the Stolen Children decade was a bit too high.

    But he also agrees that there was some genuine cases of violence. Which is my point, Australia wasn't united by no violence but it is fair to say that Australia was united by very little violence.
    INTp (MBTI)
    LII (Socionics) but typed as ILI as well
    5 wing 6
    Ti > Ni > Si > Ne > Te > Fi > Se > Fe

  5. #105
    Riva
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooraven View Post
    Yes the RAW did fund the LTTE initially but you seem to forget all that funding stopped after the IPKF mission/Rajiv Gandhi assasination. After this, the Indian parliament began funding the Government of Sri Lanka and thus according to that logic they should have been severely weakened destroyed in around 1992/3.

    But they weren't defeated until this year. 16 years after India withdrew its support and started funding Sri Lanka and due to the US Government started funding any country that was declaring war on a so called Terrorist Organization. Not to mention the millions of dollars the Chinese have given them for the naval base in Hambatonga (this is spelt incorrectly I know.)

    Get the picture?
    Its more like

    US+China+India+Sri Lanka vs the LTTE + Various Underground Networks + Norway (accused)
    The Indian Government never funded Sri Lanka. They did stop funding the LTTE.

    Which was good news for the Sri Lankan government.

    And the US government never funded Sri Lanka. But they did start calling the LTTE a terrorist organization.

    Which was good news for the Sri Lankan government.

    .................................................. ...........

    And the Sri Lankan armed forces invaded Jaffna on a couple of occasion.

    But they had to back off due to international pressure.

    1st it came from India
    Next it came from the west

    Economic sanctions, arms... etc.

    Ouch!

    But the only 2 countries which always supported Sri Lanka with weapons were the Chinese and Pakistan. Meaning they even supported and sold weapons to Sri Lanka during the weapons sanctions which was implemented on SL.

  6. #106
    Senior Member Dooraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTp
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    105

    Default

    Funding does not just mean channelling money, it comes in all shapes and sizes.

    The Indian Government never funded Sri Lanka. They did stop funding the LTTE.

    Which was good news for the Sri Lankan government.
    Actually they did:
    `India, Pak rivals but they trained, helped us fight Tigers` - Sri Lanka

    Especially with the rise of the Indian National Congress to power - did Prabakaran really expect Sonia Gandhi to forget the public death of her husband. They were complete idiots.

    Not to mention the Indian Radars and Logistical equipment that the whole internet were claiming were shitty when they failed to detect the airplanes (tincan's) that "bombed"(lol) Colombo.

    And the US government never funded Sri Lanka. But they did start calling the LTTE a terrorist organization.

    Which was good news for the Sri Lankan government.
    Once again, they actually did.

    From my previous link
    According to Balagalle, the Americans too helped with the training. But they have trained very few, and only officers. Majority of our men are trained by India and Pakistan. We sent our officers and men to India for special training in jungle warfare and counter-insurgency.
    Also

    In 2007, Congress halted US military aid to Sri Lanka over its human rights record. However, the US and India have supplied intelligence on LTTE ship movements, which has helped Sri Lanka choke off illegal arms imports
    How US 'war on terror' emboldened Sri Lanka's / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

    So the US was funding Sri Lanka militarily before 2007




    And the Sri Lankan armed forces invaded Jaffna on a couple of occasion.

    But they had to back off due to international pressure.

    1st it came from India
    Next it came from the west

    Economic sanctions, arms... etc.

    Ouch!
    The Sri Lankan Army had been in control of Jaffna since December 1995...
    India hasn't imposed any economic sanctions since Rajiv Gandhi's assassination that I'm aware of, please correct me if I'm wrong.

    Europe is only considering NOW to remove GSP+... which they won't do (and I'm actually happy about this since it is actually vital to our economy.).

    But the only 2 countries which always supported Sri Lanka with weapons were the Chinese and Pakistan. Meaning they even supported and sold weapons to Sri Lanka during the weapons sanctions which was implemented on SL.
    Agreed, so that leaves us with China + Pakistan + Sri Lanka + Privately India + intelligence of the US. versus the LTTE + the Tamil Diaspora (Somehow these guys are very very rich or something) + Taxes + Underground Contacts + apparently Norway (not even sure how they got to this assumption). And the conflict still managed to go on another 19 years. You can minus the peacetime years if you want.

    Oh and before you go around painting me as a "terrorist sympathiser" or something I'll restate what I told to Blackmail.

    I'm part Sinhalese and part Tamil - I've also lived in both the Sinhala and Tamil Areas of Galle, Anuradaphura, Colombo, Jaffna, Trincomalee and Vavuniya.

    I'm not disagreeing that they are a vicious brutal organization that deserve to be beaten badly and I rejoiced the day that Prabakaran was slain, end of a three decade brutal war that now puts the country in the hands of a racist bastard or a good general. (God I hope Foneseka wins though he probably won't do too much about the camps)

    I'm not arguing that they didn't use Child soldiers which is deplorable and disgusting.

    I'm arguing about the fact that terrorism has been used by every single state since 2001 to call anybody who disagrees with them terrorists. Do you think that the people of Xijuang province (yes I know its spelt incorrectly) are terrorists? or how about the Dalai Lama. Because China certainly seems he is:
    China accuses Dalai Lama of being a terrorist - Times Online

    Which is like the PLO and the ANC, they both were called terrorists by the respective states that they were fighting against - now suddenly they are "accepted" speakers of thier people.

    The only major thing that they have in common with each other is that they agreed to a ceasefire and talk with their opposition.
    INTp (MBTI)
    LII (Socionics) but typed as ILI as well
    5 wing 6
    Ti > Ni > Si > Ne > Te > Fi > Se > Fe

  7. #107
    Senior Member _Violence_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    And indeed you can laugh:

    Shanghai GDP is approximately of $197 billion, for 19 million inhabitants (2008).

    Taiwan GDP is approximately of $696 billion, for 23 million inhabitants (2007).

    Taiwan GDP per capita is approximately 10 times higher than the one of Mainland China (including Shanghai and Hong Kong).

    Plus Taiwan is a real democracy with almost no censorship in the medias (According to the NGO Reporters without borders, freedom of speech in Taiwanese medias were more or less at the same level than in the USA [2008]. It ranked 36 out of 173, Singapore 144 out of 173, and of course, China was 167 out of 173).
    Of course. Laughter is good.

    But it is quite easy to pour 100% of your resources into an area the size of Taiwan.

    I think such a comparison is rather flawed.

    Unless the PRC is the size of Taiwan, of course.

    Hypotheticals are, of course, irrelevant in this scenario.

    Kalach - I am not sure what it is you are exactly talking about. Besides your obvious disdain for the Chinese worldview, traditionally or present, and voicing that contempt openly.

  8. #108
    Filthy Apes! Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by _Violence_ View Post
    Kalach - I am not sure what it is you are exactly talking about. Besides your obvious disdain for the Chinese worldview, traditionally or present, and voicing that contempt openly.
    It's not contempt, more like wariness. There's a sleight of hand that goes on in Chinese political speak where regular words and phrases shift meaning. The words sound good but the meaning shifts somewhere worrisome, mostly meant to maintain exclusive power in Chinese hands. There really isn't a notion of sharing anything much at all. And it plays out as brutal suppression. So, Tibet, Xinjiang, Taiwan, the Internet world, revision of education, historical interpretation, and so on. It's greedy and mean and stultifying. Not friendly. Difficult to relate to if one is not a member of the collective.

    Somehow or other, understanding Mao as a mass murderer therefore doesn't really exist. Which is totally, totally weird.
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  9. #109
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooraven View Post
    I'm arguing about the fact that terrorism has been used by every single state since 2001 to call anybody who disagrees with them terrorists. Do you think that the people of Xijuang province (yes I know its spelt incorrectly) are terrorists? or how about the Dalai Lama. Because China certainly seems he is:
    China accuses Dalai Lama of being a terrorist - Times Online
    As I told you in private, a terrorist organization is an organization that deliberately targets civilians, either as political objectives, or simply as military targets.

    That was the case of the LTTE. They targeted first and foremost THOUSAND of civilians: monks, villagers, employees, farmers, innocent people who took the train or the bus... and so on. The list and extent of their crimes is absolutely horrifying.

    They would even make Al Qaeda look like amateurs, when you consider the sheer number of their victims.

    No other "ordinary" separatist guerilla did behave this way: it's an unique or an almost unique phenomena. It can only be compared to the Lebanese Hezbollah, which is quite similar.

    Therefore, they can be classified as a terrorist organization. And not just any terrorist organization, but probably the worst one that was ever created during the last quarter of the XXth century.

    ---

    I'm sorry, but the followers of the Dalai Lama never targeted civilians or planted bombs in trains or crowded markets.
    Plus, Dalai Lama followers won't ransom the Tamil diaspora communities like a mafia (just like the LTTE did), or execute the unfortunate shopkeepers who refuse to pay the "war tax" (we had several cases like that in Paris Tamil community).
    Do you see the difference?

    Whatever their cause was, even if it was a just cause, even if the Tamil people has really been oppressed by the Sinhalese majority, it never ever justified the way they defended it.

    So frankly, forgive me but I'd say good riddance with the LTTE!!!
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  10. #110
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooraven View Post
    So I read the summary of his book, which is to say quite good. But he only argues that the number of reports of the violence in the Stolen Children decade was a bit too high.

    But he also agrees that there was some genuine cases of violence. Which is my point, Australia wasn't united by no violence but it is fair to say that Australia was united by very little violence.
    Perhaps we are just arguing a semantic point however my claim is that we gained our independence and united a whole Continent without killing anyone. And I stand by that for no aborigines were killed to gain our independence from Britain. And no aborigines were killed to unite a whole Continent in Federation in 1901.

    And of course no one else was killed.

    We had no War of Independence like the USA or a Civil War to unite us.

    And further my claim is that we conducted ourselves peacefully among one another because we had imbibed the principles of the Enlightenment at our birth.

Similar Threads

  1. Who is the Whitest Black Person in the World?
    By RaptorWizard in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-28-2014, 11:34 AM
  2. Who Is The Greatest Movie Fantasy Bad Guy Of ALL TIME?
    By Mal12345 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06-02-2013, 06:35 PM
  3. Who is the Greatest Genius of All Time?
    By RaptorWizard in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 04-28-2013, 09:20 AM
  4. Who is the most protective type?
    By kathara in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 11:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO