George Clooney at odds with China's policy

[Yuanyang]

Often people who criticize the US are condemned as hating it. Dr. King was accused of that. He responded that it was because of his great love of the country that he wanted to see injustices stopped.

No, I'm not comparing Clooney to Dr. King. I'm saying that he uses his celebrity status for he sees for the good.

[A Mafan]

I'm being very careful to avoid using labels, and just describing the behavior/decisions I disagree with.

 

Is the topic just Clooney's activism? If so, I guess I'm done talking about it. I don't think it will do any good, but I don't support anyone forcing him to shut up. Nor do I think anyone is stupid for agreeing with him.

 

If the topic is "What should/will China do?", I would just like to add:

 

The PRC has a long-standing official policy of "no country should interfere in another country's internal issues". Sometimes that policy is honored only in the breach, but it does serve as both an excuse to not attach morality to business, but also to tell other nations to shut up about China's treatment of its own people. That probably makes it absolutely clear how Beijing will respond to Clooney.

 

Aside from that, China's history includes 10s of millions starving to death, 10s of millions being killed in riots/civil war, millions being killed/displaced/raped/tortured by invading armies, and all within only the most recent 5% of their written history and societal consciousness. Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces. Little or no effort was made by anyone in the West to alleviate that suffering. It has reinforced the Chinese worldview that you take care of you and your own, because no one else will. With that sort of worldview, it will be extremely difficult (if not impossible) for anyone to convince Beijing to change their standing policy.

 

But Clooney, et al, are certainly free to do their best.

[IllinoisDave]

Often people who criticize the US are condemned as hating it. Dr. King was accused of that. He responded that it was because of his great love of the country that he wanted to see injustices stopped.

No, I'm not comparing Clooney to Dr. King. I'm saying that he uses his celebrity status for he sees for the good.

Yes. Some,especially celebrities, who criticize certain aspects of the country do so because they love it and know just how great it could actually be.

 

But unless you're in lock-step with certain groups, waving a flag and pronouncing the US as the greatest thing on earth or god's country, you're "un-American" or a spoiled brat.

[IllinoisDave]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

[DMikeS4321]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

 

Dave,

 

I've been warned, so I won't say much, but... the West played a BIG part in Mao's ascension to power. The West's abuse of China, something the U.S. was NOT a big part of, played a tremendous role in everything that has happened in China since the 1700's. In that sense, the West had an enormous influence.

 

I think China's natural tendency is indeed to stay out of the internal arrairs of other countries, but they have probably hardened their position in that regard based on what happened to them.

 

Best Regards

[IllinoisDave]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

 

Dave,

 

I've been warned, so I won't say much, but... the West played a BIG part in Mao's ascension to power. The West's abuse of China, something the U.S. was NOT a big part of, played a tremendous role in everything that has happened in China since the 1700's. In that sense, the West had an enormous influence.

 

I think China's natural tendency is indeed to stay out of the internal arrairs of other countries, but they have probably hardened their position in that regard based on what happened to them.

 

Best Regards

Mike.

I don't think there's any argument about China's tendencies and motives for them. I think we all agree on that.

 

The real difference of opinion seems to be about whether celebrities can/should call on them to change. We'll have to agree to disagree on that and move on.

 

I'm obviously no student of Chinese history and I'm not arguing your facts. But I'm having a hard time finding any info that shows how the West specifically had a big role in Mao's ascension to power. Do you have any links I can check out on that?

 

Thanks.

Dave

[DMikeS4321]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

 

Dave,

 

I've been warned, so I won't say much, but... the West played a BIG part in Mao's ascension to power. The West's abuse of China, something the U.S. was NOT a big part of, played a tremendous role in everything that has happened in China since the 1700's. In that sense, the West had an enormous influence.

 

I think China's natural tendency is indeed to stay out of the internal arrairs of other countries, but they have probably hardened their position in that regard based on what happened to them.

 

Best Regards

Mike.

I don't think there's any argument about China's tendencies and motives for them. I think we all agree on that.

 

The real difference of opinion seems to be about whether celebrities can/should call on them to change. We'll have to agree to disagree on that and move on.

 

I'm obviously no student of Chinese history and I'm not arguing your facts. But I'm having a hard time finding any info that shows how the West specifically had a big role in Mao's ascension to power. Do you have any links I can check out on that?

 

Thanks.

Dave

 

Nothing specific, Dave, just the general abuse of China during the world's 'colonial' period. Opium War, the forced 99 year lease of Hong Kong, the trade enclaves. The resentment was so great, I think the Chinese still think about it.

 

I was surprised to have one of my friends tell me that a big factor in the Chinese 'affection' for the U.S. is that we mostly paid silver for tea when the English were paying with opium or the proceeds from the opium trade. I had no idea.

 

Once again, nothing specific, just the general historical background of the West in China.

 

As for celebrities, I generally don't care for the way we 'worship' people just because of their fame, whatever that fame is based on. I'm not sure George Clooney has any more of a handle on international issues than anyone else has; he is just listened to because he is rich and famous. So is Paris Hilton. Not a good reason to listen to someone (or, in fairness, to NOT listen to someone).

Edited March 19, 2008 by DMikeS4321 (see edit history)

[IllinoisDave]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

 

Dave,

 

I've been warned, so I won't say much, but... the West played a BIG part in Mao's ascension to power. The West's abuse of China, something the U.S. was NOT a big part of, played a tremendous role in everything that has happened in China since the 1700's. In that sense, the West had an enormous influence.

 

I think China's natural tendency is indeed to stay out of the internal arrairs of other countries, but they have probably hardened their position in that regard based on what happened to them.

 

Best Regards

Mike.

I don't think there's any argument about China's tendencies and motives for them. I think we all agree on that.

 

The real difference of opinion seems to be about whether celebrities can/should call on them to change. We'll have to agree to disagree on that and move on.

 

I'm obviously no student of Chinese history and I'm not arguing your facts. But I'm having a hard time finding any info that shows how the West specifically had a big role in Mao's ascension to power. Do you have any links I can check out on that?

 

Thanks.

Dave

 

Nothing specific, Dave, just the general abuse of China during the world's 'colonial' period. Opium War, the forced 99 year lease of Hong Kong, the trade enclaves. The resentment was so great, I think the Chinese still think about it.

 

I was surprised to have one of my friends tell me that a big factor in the Chinese 'affection' for the U.S. is that we mostly paid silver for tea when the English were paying with opium or the proceeds from the opium trade. I had no idea.

 

Once again, nothing specific, just the general historical background of the West in China.

Yeah, I understand about the more "general" interference. But I'm not sure the West can be blamed specifically in Mao's ascension or the suffering that resulted.

 

I mean wouldn't saying that the West is culpable in Mao's rise to power and what resulted from that be akin to saying that Europe/the Allies were culpable in Hitler's rise to power and the results from that?

[DMikeS4321]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

 

Dave,

 

I've been warned, so I won't say much, but... the West played a BIG part in Mao's ascension to power. The West's abuse of China, something the U.S. was NOT a big part of, played a tremendous role in everything that has happened in China since the 1700's. In that sense, the West had an enormous influence.

 

I think China's natural tendency is indeed to stay out of the internal arrairs of other countries, but they have probably hardened their position in that regard based on what happened to them.

 

Best Regards

Mike.

I don't think there's any argument about China's tendencies and motives for them. I think we all agree on that.

 

The real difference of opinion seems to be about whether celebrities can/should call on them to change. We'll have to agree to disagree on that and move on.

 

I'm obviously no student of Chinese history and I'm not arguing your facts. But I'm having a hard time finding any info that shows how the West specifically had a big role in Mao's ascension to power. Do you have any links I can check out on that?

 

Thanks.

Dave

 

Nothing specific, Dave, just the general abuse of China during the world's 'colonial' period. Opium War, the forced 99 year lease of Hong Kong, the trade enclaves. The resentment was so great, I think the Chinese still think about it.

 

I was surprised to have one of my friends tell me that a big factor in the Chinese 'affection' for the U.S. is that we mostly paid silver for tea when the English were paying with opium or the proceeds from the opium trade. I had no idea.

 

Once again, nothing specific, just the general historical background of the West in China.

Yeah, I understand about the more "general" interference. But I'm not sure the West can be blamed specifically in Mao's ascension or the suffering that resulted.

 

I mean wouldn't saying that the West is culpable in Mao's rise to power and what resulted from that be akin to saying that Europe/the Allies were culpable in Hitler's rise to power and the results from that?

 

Ah yes, we WERE culpable. I think it's pretty common knowledge that the punitive nature of the French-forced reparations after WWI played a HUGE part in the weakening of Germany and subsequent rise of Hitler. Hitler was seen as a 'savior' by most Germans. By the time MOST Germans figured out what was happening, it was too late to do anything.

 

P.S. Sorry, I was editing my last post while you were responding to it...

[IllinoisDave]

Most of that suffering was caused by Western forces.

 

Really? I agree that the West has contributed to China's problems over the years. But did the West really cause the starvations and civil wars? What about Mao?

 

I'd say much suffering was caused by the West, but "most"?

 

Dave,

 

I've been warned, so I won't say much, but... the West played a BIG part in Mao's ascension to power. The West's abuse of China, something the U.S. was NOT a big part of, played a tremendous role in everything that has happened in China since the 1700's. In that sense, the West had an enormous influence.

 

I think China's natural tendency is indeed to stay out of the internal arrairs of other countries, but they have probably hardened their position in that regard based on what happened to them.

 

Best Regards

Mike.

I don't think there's any argument about China's tendencies and motives for them. I think we all agree on that.

 

The real difference of opinion seems to be about whether celebrities can/should call on them to change. We'll have to agree to disagree on that and move on.

 

I'm obviously no student of Chinese history and I'm not arguing your facts. But I'm having a hard time finding any info that shows how the West specifically had a big role in Mao's ascension to power. Do you have any links I can check out on that?

 

Thanks.

Dave

 

Nothing specific, Dave, just the general abuse of China during the world's 'colonial' period. Opium War, the forced 99 year lease of Hong Kong, the trade enclaves. The resentment was so great, I think the Chinese still think about it.

 

I was surprised to have one of my friends tell me that a big factor in the Chinese 'affection' for the U.S. is that we mostly paid silver for tea when the English were paying with opium or the proceeds from the opium trade. I had no idea.

 

Once again, nothing specific, just the general historical background of the West in China.

Yeah, I understand about the more "general" interference. But I'm not sure the West can be blamed specifically in Mao's ascension or the suffering that resulted.

 

I mean wouldn't saying that the West is culpable in Mao's rise to power and what resulted from that be akin to saying that Europe/the Allies were culpable in Hitler's rise to power and the results from that?

 

Ah yes, we WERE culpable. I think it's pretty common knowledge that the punitive nature of the French-forced reparations after WWI played a HUGE part in the weakening of Germany and subsequent rise of Hitler. Hitler was seen as a 'savior' by most Germans. By the time MOST Germans figured out what was happening, it was too late to do anything.

 

P.S. Sorry, I was editing my last post while you were responding to it...

The reparations and restrictions placed on Germany after WWI certainly "influenced" German resentment which allowed Hitler's rise to power. But "culpable" for that along with what transpired?

 

cul穚a穊le (klp-bl)

adj.

Deserving of blame or censure as being wrong, evil, improper, or injurious.

 

While I agree that what the Allies did in Germany and what the West did in China may have influenced the rise to power of the respective tyrants, to say that either one was to "blame" for the resulting horrors perpetrated on the people of China or the population of Europe just doesn't make sense to me.

 

Maybe we're arguing semantics of words here. But my contention was that AMafan seemed to blame "most" of the suffering (starvation,civil wars etc) on the West. That's why I intentionally used culpable, for it's specific meaning. I'm saying that blaming the Allies for Hitler's atrocities and the West for Mao's seems far-fetched at best.

 

EDIT; And now we've offically REALLY gotten off topic. Sorry Carl.

Edited March 19, 2008 by IllinoisDave (see edit history)

[Guest Rob & Jin]

Personaly I think Clooney can say anything he likes, thats his right, whether I, we or China agree with it or even listen to him or not is a different matter. B)

 

Business and politics umm.....

 

I think until we (the west ) can demonstate a better track record, not really sure we can expect china or any other country to do so either.

Edited March 19, 2008 by Rob & Jin (see edit history)

[A Mafan]

I did not mean to say the US was a direct cause of most of Chinese death and suffering.

But the West (sometimes, but not always the US) did things that directly or indirectly contributed to death and suffering of millions in China, and also did nothing to alleviate said death and suffering.

 

The West helped cause the Taiping Tianguo rebellion (Western, mainly US, missionaries brought that about).

The West (Mainly UK) encouraged drug use in China to balance the trade deficit they were incurring in China.

The West used superior military might to impose Unequal Treaties in China, allowing colonies where whites could literally get away with murder without fear of reprisal...That led pretty much directly to the Boxer Rebellion.

The US used diplomatic might to force China to agree to giving all foreign colonial nations the same advantages any one of them received.

The West (particularly the US) did not end the western colonialism at the end of WWI; rather, they merely gave German colonies to Japan.

...which helped encourage Japanese colonialism on mainland China, resulting in such things as the Rape of Nanjing.

The West (ever hear of the 8 Foreign Nation Army?), conspired to keep China fractured and weak so it couldn't stop colonial exploitation. This helped encourage the growth of Communism, which normally cannot find traction in an agrarian society.

The US supported Chiang Kai-Shek, a nationalist, authoritarian dictator, against Mao ZeDong...maybe at that point it was moot, and Mao would never have been friends with the US. Or maybe it was just that we would support anyone against the Communists.

 

...in any case, our half-measures sucked. We should have worked hard to help Chiang defeat the Communists, or we should have made friends with Mao and the Communists. The isolation of the PRC and keeping the ROC on the UN until the 70s helped push the Communists into trying to go it alone. They couldn't get the food and steel from the West to feed their people or develop their industry (including agricultural industry).

 

Oh, and lets not forget the near-slavery of Chinese who worked on the railroads and in west-coast mining camps.

 

I'm not really saying we could have done anything differently. We didn't know our actions would contribute to millions of deaths. And in the end, I do generally believe that a nation should take care of itself and solve its problems itself: thus, the fighting in Darfur will stop when the Darfurians really want it to end. If some people are obstacles, we can remove the obstacles, but we cannot impose a lasting peace.

 

However, I do think no nation should go so far as to exploit another nation for its own gain. What we did in the 1800s to China was flat-out evil. We were one of the first nations to abandon colonialism, though, so I think we can be cut some slack.

 

Anyway, that's how I understand it all. So expecting China to suddenly worry about a localized conflict because George Clooney picked that cause out of a dozen possible ones, well, I don't think it's going to happen.

[IllinoisDave]

I did not mean to say the US was a direct cause of most of Chinese death and suffering.

But the West (sometimes, but not always the US) did things that directly or indirectly contributed to death and suffering of millions in China, and also did nothing to alleviate said death and suffering.

Won't argue with this. I only had a problem with the words "West" and "most" being used together. You've clarified what you meant.

 

And I agree with what you say about China and what we can expect of them.

 

I would just point out that Mr. Clooney isn't the only person or group calling on China to use it's influence. He just happens to be the one cited in this thread.

[A Mafan]

I did not mean to say the US was a direct cause of most of Chinese death and suffering.

But the West (sometimes, but not always the US) did things that directly or indirectly contributed to death and suffering of millions in China, and also did nothing to alleviate said death and suffering.

Won't argue with this. I only had a problem with the words "West" and "most" being used together. You've clarified what you meant.

 

And I agree with what you say about China and what we can expect of them.

 

I would just point out that Mr. Clooney isn't the only person or group calling on China to use it's influence. He just happens to be the one cited in this thread.

Good point.

George Clooney = stalking goat. unfair.

Edited March 19, 2008 by A Mafan (see edit history)

[DMikeS4321]

I did not mean to say the US was a direct cause of most of Chinese death and suffering.

But the West (sometimes, but not always the US) did things that directly or indirectly contributed to death and suffering of millions in China, and also did nothing to alleviate said death and suffering.

 

The West helped cause the Taiping Tianguo rebellion (Western, mainly US, missionaries brought that about).

The West (Mainly UK) encouraged drug use in China to balance the trade deficit they were incurring in China.

The West used superior military might to impose Unequal Treaties in China, allowing colonies where whites could literally get away with murder without fear of reprisal...That led pretty much directly to the Boxer Rebellion.

The US used diplomatic might to force China to agree to giving all foreign colonial nations the same advantages any one of them received.

The West (particularly the US) did not end the western colonialism at the end of WWI; rather, they merely gave German colonies to Japan.

...which helped encourage Japanese colonialism on mainland China, resulting in such things as the Rape of Nanjing.

The West (ever hear of the 8 Foreign Nation Army?), conspired to keep China fractured and weak so it couldn't stop colonial exploitation. This helped encourage the growth of Communism, which normally cannot find traction in an agrarian society.

The US supported Chiang Kai-Shek, a nationalist, authoritarian dictator, against Mao ZeDong...maybe at that point it was moot, and Mao would never have been friends with the US. Or maybe it was just that we would support anyone against the Communists.

 

...in any case, our half-measures sucked. We should have worked hard to help Chiang defeat the Communists, or we should have made friends with Mao and the Communists. The isolation of the PRC and keeping the ROC on the UN until the 70s helped push the Communists into trying to go it alone. They couldn't get the food and steel from the West to feed their people or develop their industry (including agricultural industry).

 

Oh, and lets not forget the near-slavery of Chinese who worked on the railroads and in west-coast mining camps.

 

I'm not really saying we could have done anything differently. We didn't know our actions would contribute to millions of deaths. And in the end, I do generally believe that a nation should take care of itself and solve its problems itself: thus, the fighting in Darfur will stop when the Darfurians really want it to end. If some people are obstacles, we can remove the obstacles, but we cannot impose a lasting peace.

 

However, I do think no nation should go so far as to exploit another nation for its own gain. What we did in the 1800s to China was flat-out evil. We were one of the first nations to abandon colonialism, though, so I think we can be cut some slack.

 

Anyway, that's how I understand it all. So expecting China to suddenly worry about a localized conflict because George Clooney picked that cause out of a dozen possible ones, well, I don't think it's going to happen.

 

What he said....