Why "the West" gets China wrong

pissybits said:

i disagree with your views but i admire your persistance. i can tell that i have engaged your attention and got you thinking into this issue which was my main objective anyways.....

but here's why you're wrong



what's this about insults? when did i say you insulted me？ i said you spent the majority of your argument attacking my credibility (pro-american, pro-western) instead of my argument, and the proof is in the pudding.



LOL who else were you resplying to then? i'm sorry for being so presumptuous but from what you said about philosophers and your subsequent defence, i could only conclude that you were responding (directly or indirectly) to my post.



again, i never said anything about insults, i said your primary focus is on what my political agenda rather than my argument.



nope, never said you insulted me. nice try straw manning me though. all i did was point out where you misconstrued my argument and kept labelling me as being pro-american on baseless grounds, which is conveniently evident your own quotation of yourself.

also, please stop trying to distract from the original focus, this argument is not about who insulted whom or whatever. it was about a certain fallacious attitude that i was trying to pinpoint; i apologize if you feel what i said was too harsh, but based on the content your "reasoning," my conclusions about how your attitude falls in line with the people liang opposed still stand.



the attitude you've shown by asserting that everything critical of china is pro-western, that everything has to be seen in a "china vs west/us vs them" mentality is exactly one of the biggest things wrong with china.

also, if i were so worried about "conforming," and "preserving china's image" i certainly wouldn't be sitting here arguing that chinese people shouls be self-critical, would i? your statement is oxymoronic.



some chinese people in the west like to keep to themselves so as to not 惹事生非, but this is entirely irrelevant to chinese people's political attitudes no matter how much you try and conflate the two. maybe you don't have this perspective, (being born in the u.s. and all) but there are many people in china who like to ignore all the bad things about china, whom when presented with criticism immediately resort to blaming the west or saying it's "foreign rumours." this is the view supported by the ccp for stability, and i am fully against such a complacent and irresponsible attitude. you seem to think of chinese people as being bullied, but why take the position of the weak? china today is not so weak, and these china-bashing pundits will not hurt china nor will they come to your house to beat you up.

if you keep envisioning yourself in the position of the weak you will always just feel sorry for yourself and things will never change. don't hide under your bed and shout insults instead of realizing why others are stronger and changing yourself for the better. instead, understand that these pundits in fact are coming from the position of the weak, so don't even play into rheir b.s.



lol no confessions necessary i'm not your padre. after all, chinese people on this forum are not tje ones perpetrating wrongs in china. all i'm trying to do is to get people to realize that china-bashing pundits have the power to polarize not only the opinions of the audience they pander to, but also the ability to antagonize chinese people into seeing their own country in a less than partial way as a reactionary response.

i think it's important because the fundamental step to bettering oneself, one's country, anything, is truth. you can't right all the wrongs simply by admitting them, but how can anyone ever make a difference if they ignore the facts? besides, talking from a more impartial perspective allows for much more constructive and interesting discussions.

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

You know why I'm not addressing your points? Because you're doing what you accuse me of doing revolving around misquoting or misinterpretation or telling me what I believe. I've experienced that passive aggressive bull before in this forum so I'm not going to bother with your distractions. See I already know your spinning telling me what I believe like you automatically assume I/we in here defend China with no apologies. I don't do that. I don't like the communist government. It's you that hypocritically assume I outright defend the communist government because you the newbie are judging me by what little of what you've read so far in this forum. The newbie acting like you already know everyone's motives in here? Insult ... attack... same thing. You say I'm attacking your personal credibility? How? Just because I dare to question you? If you need it to be reworded just replace "insult" with "attack" and it's still the same. Where did I "attack" you? And still no "attacks" that you can point out until you "attacked" me. So don't be so sensitive since I only dish what you serve.

Click to expand...

pissybits said:

don't kid yourself, if you think i'm the one doing the misquoting then you'd better learn to read more carefully. the proper way to debate is to attack an argument not the individual. you attacked my persobal credibility from the get go by asserting that i somehow had a "pro-western" agenda. i don't know how i can make this clearer. attack my argument all you want, that is the point of debate. but when you just attack my credibility then it's just pointless and cheap.

furthermore, ALL you do in this last post is attack me as a person and my motivations so, and you've even confirmed your inability/unwillimgness to engage in meaningful discussion in your own words, because you supposedly "seen it all before."

i didn't know how you thought until you replied to my post. i was noticing and warning against a particular mode of thinking, but YOU'RE the one that put yourself in my crosshairs and became antagonized. YOU'RE the one that felt the need to take an indefensible stance. i never claimed that all the members of this forum fall into the the paychology that i describe, but i know it exists because i even notice myself being prone to such a mindset at certain times. YOU'RE the one who is bringing up how this mindset is somehow "the motive of all the forum members here."

you keep saying how i'm being overly sensitive, but just look at how incoherent and fired up your last post is. you furthermore try to sabotage my credibility by calling me a newbie and whatever. this is the same ad hominem stuff you've pulled all along, and it just shows what level you are operating at.

if you can remain objective and see china impartially like you say, then good for you! but when you're going to respond to me pointing out the phenomenon of the negative polarizing effects of western pundits by implying that i'm one of these "people who think chinese should take abuse" then what am i suppoaed to think? you may not have quoted me in that post, but then who were you addressing? at least take responaibility for your words.

no i don't know you in person, yes i'm getting an opinion of your views from this forum, so what? that is what forums are for. i don't know what your real political views are, but the views you've expressed just by responding to me in this thread have shown that you are the type of person i was talking about.

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

You still haven't pointed out how I attacked you. You seem to be avoiding doing just that. I already posted my posts to the point you "attacked" me personally. You still have shown where I attacked you personally first as to justify to yourself a reason to attack me personally. I never said you were pro-West as some sort of negative context. I said by reading your other posts you wanted to use the US as a model for China. To which confused me since a lot of the conformity and conduct you demand goes against the US value of individualism. And then you're so sensitive to criticism yourself which is hypocritical of you wanting the Chinese to pick and choose their battles, you seem to blow up on any criticism of your arguments. You're not practicing what you're preaching. I'm the one that promoted individualism saying that I don't agree with what a lot of what Chinese say but I don't tell them how to think like you do. So how does mentioning that you want to use the US as a model for China equate to a charge of being pro-US? I pointed out what the Chinese you criticize is in this forum do is very American. So I don't know how you jumped to the conclusion I was charging you were pro-US as a slander. I was pointing out your contradiction that you want the use the US as a model but reject the American values of individualism which Chinese culture also doesn't like.

You're the one avoiding the questions. It's because you want no one questioning you. That's funny since you're the one telling the Chinese they should start pointing the finger at themselves instead of outsiders.

Click to expand...

pissybits said:

i see you're rather fixated on the word "attack," let me break it down for you: please do not misunderstand me when i say "attack," i'm not talking about personal insults but the method of argumentation. in a reasonable debate you attack your opponent's statements logically, not by pinning ideologies to them and attacking what you think that ideology is. debating in such a way is not productive because you are not even trying to figure out how your opponent thinks, rather imposing your own beliefs about their "stance" on them and attacking that. when you started calling my views pro-american and using that as the basis for your debate, you have already committed the straw man fallacy, which is what i have been trying to get across for too many posts now.

i don't give a damn what is "very american" or "very chinese." these terms have no solid meaning and mean different things in different contexts. (who's to say that "individualism" is strictly american and "conformity" is strictly chinese?) i am not interested in getting in a debate on what each of these ideas perscribe. i am interested in progress, i am interested in a good way to respond to china-bashing pundits. i have presented my view and given some reasons for why i think this way. i'm forcing no one to subscribe to my views (contrary to your claim) and i welcome criticism on why my reasoning is faulty so i can make it better.

you sir however have for the most part been criticising (or attacking) my supposed political motives rather than my argument. (like in the above post)
i feel that this results in a futile debate and leads nowhere because it relies on a false dichotomy rather than valid argumentation.

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

You're the one so anal about "insult" and "attack." Again... you're still avoiding pointing out all you're whining that I "attacked" you. Never said anything about "very American" or "very Chinese."

Click to expand...

pissybits said:

lol now this is getting silly...

maybe you've forgotten what you wrote, i suggest you read your own posts. have your self a nice day.

i've enjoyed the exercise haha

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

If I forgot, why don't you point it out for me? Maybe because you can't point out this supposed "attack" that hurt your feelings and sent you into a flying uncontrollable rage where you ended up being sensitive about everything thus violating what you just dictated to everyone here not to do in taking every slight seriously?

Click to expand...

pissybits said:

because:

1. i don't care, it's not my responsibility to check your facts for you at this point because you are obviously not interested in discussing western pundits and how to react, to which your request is irrelevant.

2. because i'm a "dictator" in a "flying uncontrollable rage," who does not have the patience to play this vindicative game that you call debate. happy?

good day

Click to expand...

pissybits said:

if you study law, you will notice that there are certain prescriptions that make for a just and accountable judiciary.

what a functioning judiciary tries to achieve is government accountability, and in the midst of china's current wave of fiscal reform, there is NOTHING more important than accountability.

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

You're the accuser that said you were wronged. Ever hear it's up to the accuser to prove guilt not the accused that has to prove him or herself innocent.

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

More of your hypocrisy. "Just and more accountable judiciary?" Do you just throw that out the window when it suits you?

Click to expand...