SinoSoldier
Colonel
Wait, are you serious? I've heard rumors about how Japanese products were once ridiculed but I simply dismissed it as an attempt to ward off racism against the Chinese.
Why "the West" gets China wrong
- Thread starter solarz
- Start date
- Status
Wait, are you serious? I've heard rumors about how Japanese products were once ridiculed but I simply dismissed it as an attempt to ward off racism against the Chinese.
solarz
Brigadier
Apparently, you've never watched Back to the Future.
The commentaries why the West getting China wrong or vice-versa can continue to time immemorial. Cases in history can be quoted to justify their respective criticisms. It really depends on how far you want to go back in history, as both sides have valid examples (both good and bad). However, that said we should really look at what is presently happening - Who is exerting their power indiscriminately? Who is bullying who (especially small nations) and for what reasons? Finally: are the citizens happy and are really free to express themselves without fear of being repressed unfairly.
The more I see the US actions both here and abroad the more it mirrors the Soviets in its cynicism and teleological extremism, to the point that the US may have won the Cold War but lost the peace...
Fantastic interview with a representative of China's new left, he mentions the need for democracy but also points out that in real case studies it falls apart under China's conditions because lack of general and economic development makes corruption inevitable
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Here is a good piece on how importance reliable, unbiased information and analysis is to the understanding of an opponent and how your entire strategy might hinge on that analysis.
In the article, it was illustrated how America's entire Vietnam strategy was influenced by the analysis of one man who failed to look at the available intelligence objectively and instead allowed his own bias and preconceptions to influence his analysis.
While the article seem to suggest the choice was once of chance, I cannot help but feel that the reason that Goure was lauded and his opinion value while Kellen was ignored and shunned was because Goure told those in power what they wanted to hear, and the men in power preferred that to the realism Kellen offered.
I feel that today, the message of this article is more important that ever, because in the modern age, when the role of media is more important than ever and governments and interest groups are paying more and more attention towards managing and controlling the selection, interpretation and narrative of breaking events and becoming more and more skilled at using information and propaganda as tools and even weapons, the risks are never higher than those in power and even those who manipulate the news start to sample their own wares and start to believe the distortions and misinformation they themselves are peddling.
With China perpetually on the receiving end of much of this distortion and propaganda, there is a very real risk that the west will needlessly make China an enemy when neither side want to be at odds with the other.
I really hope it does not take another world war and the millions or even billions of deaths that will result for humanity to learn the importance of reliable, unbiased information and the dangers of manipulating news for the self serving ends of governments or special interests.
As the saying goes, knowledge is power, and those who control it has enormous influence on the course of world events. It is well past time we as a species realize that and raise the standard, integrity and independence of journalism and journalists out of the gutters where it currently resides and up to the position where it deserves. The first and most important steps would be to establish and implement a minimum entry requirement for journalists to make sure those reporting the news are competant enough to understand and explain what they are seeing, and also establish professional ethics regarding independence and accuracy so we do not have the blatantly biased and partisan news corporations we have today.
In the article, it was illustrated how America's entire Vietnam strategy was influenced by the analysis of one man who failed to look at the available intelligence objectively and instead allowed his own bias and preconceptions to influence his analysis.
While the article seem to suggest the choice was once of chance, I cannot help but feel that the reason that Goure was lauded and his opinion value while Kellen was ignored and shunned was because Goure told those in power what they wanted to hear, and the men in power preferred that to the realism Kellen offered.
I feel that today, the message of this article is more important that ever, because in the modern age, when the role of media is more important than ever and governments and interest groups are paying more and more attention towards managing and controlling the selection, interpretation and narrative of breaking events and becoming more and more skilled at using information and propaganda as tools and even weapons, the risks are never higher than those in power and even those who manipulate the news start to sample their own wares and start to believe the distortions and misinformation they themselves are peddling.
With China perpetually on the receiving end of much of this distortion and propaganda, there is a very real risk that the west will needlessly make China an enemy when neither side want to be at odds with the other.
I really hope it does not take another world war and the millions or even billions of deaths that will result for humanity to learn the importance of reliable, unbiased information and the dangers of manipulating news for the self serving ends of governments or special interests.
As the saying goes, knowledge is power, and those who control it has enormous influence on the course of world events. It is well past time we as a species realize that and raise the standard, integrity and independence of journalism and journalists out of the gutters where it currently resides and up to the position where it deserves. The first and most important steps would be to establish and implement a minimum entry requirement for journalists to make sure those reporting the news are competant enough to understand and explain what they are seeing, and also establish professional ethics regarding independence and accuracy so we do not have the blatantly biased and partisan news corporations we have today.
airsuperiority
Captain
I totally agree with you, especially about the last part regarding journalism ethics. Unfortunately, journalism is not a profession like law or doctor, and also not even seen by the industry quite that way neither. Also, sensation sells, and I am starting to think part of their marketing schemes is to write controversial stuffs or things that appeals to the public, or simply most of these journalists don't possess sufficient information, understanding, or capability to self-regulate their own views. And I really do think the whole brand equity thing matters. Communism rings a bad taste to the mouth when you pronounce the word, and it's going to be the how China remains to be seen in the eyes of the public until Communism is gone. Tibet is still seen by the West as unjust and invasion of Chinese Communist, and I don't think the West will change that perception until democracy arrives in China and a new political party representing Tibetans emerge as one of the many parties competing in elections for seats in the parliament or something along that line. As for Chinese goods, it probably requires news of faulty Chinese products to truly disappear, quality of Chinese products and practices to catch up properly, then giant brands begin to emerge (like Samsung, Toyota)
I don't think anyone is interested in hating China because hate is tiring . However, we must remember that stereotypes are usually based on simple yet symbolic actions (Tiananmen), and it takes the same to combat it.
I agree with the both of you, at the same time.
Wolf: Its incredibly sad that this seems to be something that exists mutually in all societies, not just American but also Russia suffered this to much worse extent from the Breshnev years onward, consensus building is something that is always crucial to running any society or operation. The fact that this happened in government with academically trained people makes this even more distressing as these people should've been trained to know better, such is the fallibility of human nature to accept truth only from trusted sources and that trust itself is a very finite commodity.
Airsuperiority: Its still a rather circular problem, symbols only become known once they are displayed for all to see and once the proper context and narrative is in place, its very easy for an english language journalist to take a speech about friendship and turn it into an attack, making a diplomat seem like a warmonger.
Wolf: Its incredibly sad that this seems to be something that exists mutually in all societies, not just American but also Russia suffered this to much worse extent from the Breshnev years onward, consensus building is something that is always crucial to running any society or operation. The fact that this happened in government with academically trained people makes this even more distressing as these people should've been trained to know better, such is the fallibility of human nature to accept truth only from trusted sources and that trust itself is a very finite commodity.
Airsuperiority: Its still a rather circular problem, symbols only become known once they are displayed for all to see and once the proper context and narrative is in place, its very easy for an english language journalist to take a speech about friendship and turn it into an attack, making a diplomat seem like a warmonger.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Well it's not only Goure. That was pretty much how a lot of people thought. Goure tells the narrative that the masses would rather believe. Even if it cost them the war, Americans will still rather hear how the US is breaking the Viet Cong and they're about to surrender. It makes them feel they're in the position of power. From a political perspective, it keeps the American people in support of the war. "Don't give up now. We're about to win." The fact is Kellan could really do nothing because denial is more powerful. Malcolm Gladwell should realize it didn't really matter if Kellan had a voice in these affairs... that things would've been different if he did. The thing is people still think like that. Just go to other military forums. People there would rather hear that China can only copy or steal because it makes them feel superior. China will never surpass them because China can't do anything on its own. That makes people complacent and they don't have to be vigilant. Before the J-20, they didn't think it was possible. Did that open their eyes when it emerged? No, they just think up more excuses to believe in the same thing because it sounds better to them. When Nixon opened up China someone asked him if he was worried he could be helping a potential enemy in the future. Nixon replied that was never going to happen because China was never going to develop much further than it was back then.
- Status