training exercise HK Oct 2012-combined force


solarz

Brigadier
The problem with patriotism education in China is that no one takes it seriously, not even the educators. They only see it as easy political points. No one really cares about *educating* the students.

Hence why we see the endless variations on the same old themes. Hell, textbooks are *still* talking about Chairman Mao visiting the common people. I mean, seriously? And even when they try to "modernize" the content, they still make only the most minimal effort possible, such as replacing Mao with Deng or Hu, and having almost the exact same story.
 
The problem with patriotism education in China is that no one takes it seriously, not even the educators. They only see it as easy political points. No one really cares about *educating* the students.

Hence why we see the endless variations on the same old themes. Hell, textbooks are *still* talking about Chairman Mao visiting the common people. I mean, seriously? And even when they try to "modernize" the content, they still make only the most minimal effort possible, such as replacing Mao with Deng or Hu, and having almost the exact same story.
Sounds like how Stalin used to photoshop himself with Lenin lol
 

JsCh

Junior Member
Very neutral, objective, and good analysis. I very agree with you. I do not detest China. Instead my views are pro-China(early forum days) to neutral to critical towards China(current). While I do carry some bias for sure, I attribute to China fairly for what it's done right and wrong, and I try hard to be a tough yet fair critic of China because I try to maintain a down to earth view of China.

Speaking of '97, one must understand Tiananmen Massacre was what destroyed China's image the most. If HK had a better view towards China beforehand, which is not so much, June 4th really destroyed anything that's left. Before June 4th, Cultural Revolutions also burned deep because many escaped to HK, so essentially the biggest divergence I reckon, would start from those times. My parents brought us to Vancouver in '94 cause of those fears. Although '97 happened without bloodshed, still there are new problems that are being (un)fairly attributed as being caused from China.

I also admit there's a huge mistrust within people from both straits. For honesty I can see China attempting to reconcile with HK, but we do just prefer to be left alone. It's not good, but definitely negative events in HK that's being associated with China will not help. If China really wants to work things out, I suggest leaving the problem. I very admit there's a strong element of HK superiority over China, and I do not agree with this, but this is a very common phenomenon in social psychology. Ingroups will attempt to see itself a superior, especially when they have legitimate grounds. Such phenomenon occurs everywhere, particularly cities where there's a bigger minority group or strong in immigration. Such xenophobia are common, and often the only way is to increase cooperation and working together and looking for similarities without dismissing diversity. This is because each group sees their own social identity as important, so trying to dismiss it(assimilation) will cause a backlash.

Finally, HK's biggest mistrust, as with Taiwan's biggest mistrusts, would be China's intentions. We/They always feared China will pull off "China political suppression" towards their societies, hence the mistrust. Article 23 and Nationalistic Education thus received such impressions as attempts. One is seen as attempt to suppress freedom of speech, while the other is seen as brainwash. Honestly, Beijing shouldn't have to ever worry HK going rogue..my best picture to paint this is HK is equivalent of the kid who's got his own room and his own world and his way of doing things and doesn't like all that jazz the the rest of the family is pulling off. However when sh!t happens he'll still be part of the family, and still identify self as Chinese. Let's consider the fundraising for Sichuan Earthquake and the support for Beijing Olympics. HK doesn't need to be taught how to love. One crucial aspect, I'd show you, is the examples of differences, and why these cause distastes. (Let's not forget these differences are also values):
Things I highlight are minor. Italicized will be more serious, with bold being the worst. What I place in the middle doesn't affect too much


HK-------------------------------------------------------------------------------China
Rule of law, World Ranking for Least Corruption #12, ICAC----------------Corruption
Traditional ----------------------------------------------------------------------Simplified
Freedom of Speech and Assembly----------------------------------------Censorship
Respect for intellectual property and ethic business practice------------------Quality issues and tainted milk powder
-------------------------------------------Orderly mannerisms
-------------------------------------------------HKD ---RMB
---------------------------------------------------Education
-------------------------------------------------Local Cultures

My point from this illustration isn't to say HK is better. These are some major differences we are associated with. I won't get into similarities because I can go on forever.

I'm not saying HK's behavior is right, but HK has its own identity, and that the most ultimate way for China and both sides to fix things is to recognize the differences and then learn how to soothe around the sensitive edges and find more common grounds. Working in from common grounds is the best way to start things. And China will have more to do.

And one area that China had done well in HK is the PLA garrison..which generally didn't disturb HK's civilian lifestyles. These things actually can help improve China's image in the long run. It's just that they need to reduce interference in local affairs even more, and pro-Beijing parties can sometimes be an issue if they are seen to be speaking for China.

If anything, China can attempt to garner more support from HK by supporting some of HK's decisions, including direct elections, heed HK people's complaints, and establish a more direct access of communication paths.
June 4th is an unfortunate incident that happens during China early experiment with capitalism. HK has had an active role. I can understand HK support and subsequent utter disappointment. But that was 20 years ago. A lot has gone by since then. It would be a mistake for anyone to still hold this anachronistic view of Beijing vs HK as an ideological rival. It is a totally wrong read in assuming Beijing has an intention of indoctrinating the communist ideology to HK.
Today when Hu Jintao speaks of the long term national aspiration, he did not say attainment of Communism, what he said is national rejuvenation. And these had been repeated over and over again year after year. Today what hold China together is not a common vision of a political ideology, it is a common vision of a people.
What HKer has to understand is no matter you like it or not, HK’s fate is tie with China. Nobody has a crystal ball that can tell the future, we all have to take it as it goes. Therefore it would be wise for HK to stay at the good side of the mainlander (I know that is very hard to stomach). From the mainlander point of view, what they ask is little. That Hk would take China interest at heart, not embarrassing China whenever an opportunity arises.
Both Article 23 and Nationalistic education are all meant for establishing a nationalistic patriotism. A common ground as you mentioned. In all political policy making or even a discussion or debate, there require a certain sincerity from the participant. Understanding that there is a consensus on what is reasonable and acceptable, of adherent to certain universal value/truth. In most country that consensus is the national interest or as you put it, patriotism should not be political. Unfortunately, we often have this impression of the lack thereof this basic integrity from some HK politician.
From Beijing point of view, HK is often unreasonable. Once the sensational demagogue hijacks the political agenda, Beijing is helpless against it. As you had mentioned, supporting or even speaking the Beijing point of view would be considered as treacherous, and that from Beijing point of view, is unreasonable. All the conjured up image of Beijing controlling HKer live are all imaginary, they have no basis in fact. Beijing has kept to her promise, and there is no reason not to give her the benefit of the doubt.
Beijing has so far always back down whenever HKer object, but one had to realize that this type of one way relationship is not healthy. While the intoxicating sense of power is great, HKer has to see that this is a dangerous game they are playing. I do not know how creditable it is, but recently there is mainland official that warn against a HK independent movement. It is an indication that Beijing is wary of development in HK. It is well known that Beijing has always been suspicious of foreign "subversive element" in HK. If HK lost it civil order, it would be a huge loss-loss situation for both sides. Therefore Beijing might consider it important to act to nip it in the bud.
Growing out of her frustration, Beijing would see introducing nationalistic education as exercising Beijing rights to put in her side of the story. It is an attempt to lessen the deep rooted prejudice that some HKer has. Only when Beijing is not viewed as the caricature bogeymen, when Beijing concern and view point are considered, then a meaningful and sustainable relationship could have existed. I think Beijing would have left HK alone as long as HK do not hurt the interest of China.
 

aquauant

Junior Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #64
June 4th is an unfortunate incident that happens during China early experiment with capitalism. HK has had an active role. I can understand HK support and subsequent utter disappointment. But that was 20 years ago. A lot has gone by since then. It would be a mistake for anyone to still hold this anachronistic view of Beijing vs HK as an ideological rival. It is a totally wrong read in assuming Beijing has an intention of indoctrinating the communist ideology to HK.
Today when Hu Jintao speaks of the long term national aspiration, he did not say attainment of Communism, what he said is national rejuvenation. And these had been repeated over and over again year after year. Today what hold China together is not a common vision of a political ideology, it is a common vision of a people.
What HKer has to understand is no matter you like it or not, HK’s fate is tie with China. Nobody has a crystal ball that can tell the future, we all have to take it as it goes. Therefore it would be wise for HK to stay at the good side of the mainlander (I know that is very hard to stomach). From the mainlander point of view, what they ask is little. That Hk would take China interest at heart, not embarrassing China whenever an opportunity arises.
Both Article 23 and Nationalistic education are all meant for establishing a nationalistic patriotism. A common ground as you mentioned. In all political policy making or even a discussion or debate, there require a certain sincerity from the participant. Understanding that there is a consensus on what is reasonable and acceptable, of adherent to certain universal value/truth. In most country that consensus is the national interest or as you put it, patriotism should not be political. Unfortunately, we often have this impression of the lack thereof this basic integrity from some HK politician.
From Beijing point of view, HK is often unreasonable. Once the sensational demagogue hijacks the political agenda, Beijing is helpless against it. As you had mentioned, supporting or even speaking the Beijing point of view would be considered as treacherous, and that from Beijing point of view, is unreasonable. All the conjured up image of Beijing controlling HKer live are all imaginary, they have no basis in fact. Beijing has kept to her promise, and there is no reason not to give her the benefit of the doubt.
Beijing has so far always back down whenever HKer object, but one had to realize that this type of one way relationship is not healthy. While the intoxicating sense of power is great, HKer has to see that this is a dangerous game they are playing. I do not know how creditable it is, but recently there is mainland official that warn against a HK independent movement. It is an indication that Beijing is wary of development in HK. It is well known that Beijing has always been suspicious of foreign "subversive element" in HK. If HK lost it civil order, it would be a huge loss-loss situation for both sides. Therefore Beijing might consider it important to act to nip it in the bud.
Growing out of her frustration, Beijing would see introducing nationalistic education as exercising Beijing rights to put in her side of the story. It is an attempt to lessen the deep rooted prejudice that some HKer has. Only when Beijing is not viewed as the caricature bogeymen, when Beijing concern and view point are considered, then a meaningful and sustainable relationship could have existed. I think Beijing would have left HK alone as long as HK do not hurt the interest of China.
sigh.... I guess some westerners will never end their attempts in pitting chinese against chinese at every disagreement they come upon. You just can't understand we chinese are individuals, with different views and different backgrounds. We argue and fight but the bottom line is that we are one nation with one destiny. We share the same values, both good and bad. If some of us dont share the same view, they mostly like to choose to leave. If you are holding a foreign passport or a permanent resident of another country, I am sure you believe in your nation even though you may not agree with your fellow countrymen, your president or pm. You can still be patriotic. You are as committed to your country as I to mine. You may even despise some of your countrymen; but if your country goes to war with China, no one should doubt you will fight for your country against us. And we have no doubt to see you as enemy.

The protesters are not HK. The news media are not hk. When you say "....HK is often unreasonable". You mean the government of HK, representing HK, is unreasonable. Representing the government is our CE. Do you mean he is unreasonable? Not many HK people like him,I do accept, but he does represent HK. Unless of course you know every hker's views and you found all 7 million of them are unreasonable toward the central government. I guess when you say HK is often unreasonable you mean some of the HKers' are unreasonable .. Well, if you go to every place in CHina, you will find unreasonable people towards the government, China... But I dont think one would say Chinese are against China just because you happen to hear opinions, news of protesters. Although I respect their rights to protest and sometimes agree to some of the causes, I dont think they are enough to represent the view of whole population. Just as you are interested in our country, I will not even dare to speculate that you and your countrymen are of the same view towards my country.

I begin to get amused by members like you who take such interests of our country, even though misguided. Anyway, I dont think you will ever understand us Chinese nationals.
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
I see this as comparable to a marriage. You get a lot of perks when you marry: companionship with the one you love, help with house work, extra family income, support during troubled times, etc. There are also a lot of conflicts: arguments over how and where to spend money, arguments over housework, over in-laws, etc. etc.

Likewise, Hongkong gets a lot of advantages when it returned to China, mainland tourism dollars being not the least of those perks. There's a reason the biggest HK stars, like Andy Lau and Jackie Chan, are singing Mainland praises. However, like in all marriages, there will be disagreements.

Beijing doesn't really understand plural democracy. It's used to the government speaking for the people in one voice. It cannot understand a system like Hongkong where those who cry loudly do not necessarily represent a majority or even a mainstream view.

At the same time, Hongkong can't understand the way Beijing does things. It doesn't understand that Beijing needs to keep two facades, one to please the Old Guard in the CCP, and another to actually build progress. It doesn't understand that Beijing needs to walk a fine balance in order to keep the Chinese government working smoothly.

I expect to see the Old Guard mentality slowly fade out in the coming decades, if not years. I don't really care for these kinds of blunt propaganda either. I wasn't sad to see Bo Xilai go, for example, as he clearly represented the Old Guard in this respect, with his renewal of "red songs".
 
As someone who cares about the future of Hong Kong and China I just want to say that I am really glad that such an open, honest, passionate, and thoughtful discussion is taking place on these related topics in this forum.
 
As someone who cares about the future of Hong Kong and China I just want to say that I am really glad that such an open, honest, passionate, and thoughtful discussion is taking place on these related topics in this forum.
I can't agree more. I just have to make an explicit statement that I really appreciate everyone's voices here in discussing this, particularly PanAsian, Solarz(your most recent posts are absolutely awesome), Aquauant, Equation, JackLiu, mwryum, jsch. All of you had provided really great ideas, thoughts, and opinions. They may all be from different perspectives, but how we're able to discuss and share like intellectuals is awesome and you guys earned my respect. yea maybe some disagreements in the middle and early on and my behaviors trailed off at times, but I can only say I'm humbled to share the room with you folks.

you guys spelled the reason why this is my favorite discussion forum and why i'd keep following here.
 

JsCh

Junior Member
sigh.... I guess some westerners will never end their attempts in pitting chinese against chinese at every disagreement they come upon. You just can't understand we chinese are individuals, with different views and different backgrounds. We argue and fight but the bottom line is that we are one nation with one destiny. We share the same values, both good and bad. If some of us dont share the same view, they mostly like to choose to leave. If you are holding a foreign passport or a permanent resident of another country, I am sure you believe in your nation even though you may not agree with your fellow countrymen, your president or pm. You can still be patriotic. You are as committed to your country as I to mine. You may even despise some of your countrymen; but if your country goes to war with China, no one should doubt you will fight for your country against us. And we have no doubt to see you as enemy.

The protesters are not HK. The news media are not hk. When you say "....HK is often unreasonable". You mean the government of HK, representing HK, is unreasonable. Representing the government is our CE. Do you mean he is unreasonable? Not many HK people like him,I do accept, but he does represent HK. Unless of course you know every hker's views and you found all 7 million of them are unreasonable toward the central government. I guess when you say HK is often unreasonable you mean some of the HKers' are unreasonable .. Well, if you go to every place in CHina, you will find unreasonable people towards the government, China... But I dont think one would say Chinese are against China just because you happen to hear opinions, news of protesters. Although I respect their rights to protest and sometimes agree to some of the causes, I dont think they are enough to represent the view of whole population. Just as you are interested in our country, I will not even dare to speculate that you and your countrymen are of the same view towards my country.

I begin to get amused by members like you who take such interests of our country, even though misguided. Anyway, I dont think you will ever understand us Chinese nationals.
First off, I am not a westerner and second, it is not my intention to pit HK against Beijing or vice versa. It is true that I speak on the side of Beijing but they are all said in good faith.
I wrote to a HKer trying to make him/her understand a few points.
1.
June 4th is an unfortunate incident that happens during China early experiment with capitalism. HK has had an active role. I can understand HK support and subsequent utter disappointment. But that was 20 years ago. A lot has gone by since then. It would be a mistake for anyone to still hold this anachronistic view of Beijing vs HK as an ideological rival. It is a totally wrong read in assuming Beijing has an intention of indoctrinating the communist ideology to HK.
I said that (the bold part) because I feel that some pro democracy political party in HK and also Taiwan still held this cold war mentality and define their relationship with China as such.
2.
What HKer has to understand is no matter you like it or not, HK’s fate is tie with China. Nobody has a crystal ball that can tell the future, we all have to take it as it goes. Therefore it would be wise for HK to stay at the good side of the mainlander (I know that is very hard to stomach). From the mainlander point of view, what they ask is little. That Hk would take China interest at heart, not embarrassing China whenever an opportunity arises.
HK wish to have a firewall to any possible political turmoil like June 4th, unfortunately only the almighty can promise her that. Some HKer gets themselves involve either directly or as providing a base for “color revolution” like element in mainland politic. And yet she wants to be immune to the possible ill consequence. I simply want to point out that interfering too much in other people politic is never wise.
HK react vehemently when Beijing is view as interfering with HK politic and yet HK do interfere in China politic and not all mainlander like it you know.
Some HKer believe that only if China become democratic, then HK would be safe. That logic is too simplistic and is again cold war mentality.
Beijing has kept her promise and never overtly interferes. There is no reason to believe that policy would change unless Beijing views HK becoming a threat.
3.
Both Article 23 and Nationalistic education are all meant for establishing a nationalistic patriotism. A common ground as you mentioned. In all political policy making or even a discussion or debate, there require a certain sincerity from the participant. Understanding that there is a consensus on what is reasonable and acceptable, of adherent to certain universal value/truth. In most country that consensus is the national interest or as you put it, patriotism should not be political. . Unfortunately, we often have this impression of the lack thereof this basic integrity from some HK politician.
This argues and explains China attempt (with Article 23 and Nationalistic education) for the establishment of a common ground of nationalistic patriotism. And points out that this is the same in most country where National interest is the common ground. It is a mistake for some HK politician to view HK vs Beijing as ideological rival and put too much weight on their own political ideology above national interest. It is like what you said, citizen can argue and disagree, but when come times of crisis, like in time of war, national interest should be above all differences.
4.
From Beijing point of view, HK is often unreasonable. Once the sensational demagogue hijacks the political agenda, Beijing is helpless against it. As you had mentioned, supporting or even speaking the Beijing point of view would be considered as treacherous, and that from Beijing point of view, is unreasonable. All the conjured up image of Beijing controlling HKer live are all imaginary, they have no basis in fact. Beijing has kept to her promise, and there is no reason not to give her the benefit of the doubt. .
This part is saying that HK look unreasonable not because of all HK, but because HK allows herself to be hijack by sensational demagogue.
子曰:君子不以言举人, 不以人废言.
It is unfortunate for HK to still have this cold war image of Beijing, but she still should listen to reason, not automatically shut Beijing out.
I also explain that Beijing would see nationalistic education as a way of addressing that particular problem.


It is no secret that HK would prefer democracy as their form of government. But for democracy to work, there require a sensible political tradition as the common ground. Democracy has the tendency to intensify differences. It is important that HK should become mature enough to overcome their prejudice and establish a healthy political tradition.

Maybe I am too blunt in accusing HK for being unreasonable. Maybe I am making an unnecessary big thing out of all this. There is absolutely no reason that both sides would not get what they essentially wish for. The problem looks like a lack of trust. Beijing has done all that she could for the last 15 years in good faith and it is my personal opinion that HK should trust Beijing a bit more and give her the benefit of the doubt. That is the way how trust is built.
子曰:以直报怨,以德报德
 

jackliu

Banned Idiot
As someone who cares about the future of Hong Kong and China I just want to say that I am really glad that such an open, honest, passionate, and thoughtful discussion is taking place on these related topics in this forum.
I hope I can find a similar discussion like this about Japan, I would really like to learn more about that country.
 

Top