Why "the West" gets China wrong

Status
Not open for further replies.

superdog

Junior Member
Do you admit that people from Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore are the reason why the stereotype of bad behaving Chinese tourists exists? There never seems to be an admission to it. There's always a denial and the attempt to separate identity as if they didn't do it themselves. Did I ever say Mainland Chinese don't do it? No, I've always been arguing people from Hong Kong, Taiwan, or Singapore are no different and it's something as despicable as trying to abandon ship before the women and children. You may not see but it does look like Hong Kongers are sucking up to their British masters.
I would advise not to use generalizations to attack other generalizations. If you don't intent to accept (neither do I) criticisms that use individual instances of bad behaving Chinese tourists to blame Chinese people as a whole, than you may want to think twice before putting labels on "people from Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore". It is okay and important to point out that similar behaviors existed in other demographics and that there is confirmation bias involved in the hype of characterizing certain bad behaviors as "Chinese" or "Mainland-Chinese" in nature. This is why I like this thread as people like you stand out to identify the hypocrisy in the air. But in doing so I think we should refrain from using the same bias we criticize to put blame on other groups as a whole. Even if the intent is to disprove by contradiction -- "give them a taste of their own medicine", this is not a very productive way to make our views understandable and convincing. After all, how can we ask others to view a "bad behaving Chinese tourist" as it is and not as "the bad behaving Chinese people", if we don't do it ourselves when we judge other groups of Non-Mainland-Chinese?

It should be noted that I'm not asking anyone to never identify trends and only see everything as incidental individual actions, that would be in denial too; but still, a trend, if it really exist, is what it is: a pattern of behaviors done by a certain percentage of people facilitated by certain environmental factors. In most cases, this is still not justifiable as a characteristic inherent to any race, ethnic, or cultural groups of people; it still makes no sense to put collective moral burden on those who belongs to the same group but didn't engage or encourage the particular behavior. So, we should take care in formulating our statements to reduce the chance of them being interpreted as such a label or moral accusation. Don't forget that our language affects our cognition, by being more careful in making statements we will also become less susceptible to biases and stereotypes ourselves.

BTW, this is not just a comment on your post, but equally to airsuperiority as well.
 
Last edited:

superdog

Junior Member
1. Your first whole paragraph I knew that already. I actually took your stance and challenged them for doing just that. I'm very clear of what goes on in HK, and unlike the pro-China supporters, I don't always defend HK no matter the cost. I actually even criticize them for it.

2. There are 2 types of Westerners. The playful ones and the douchebags. The playful ones don't always cause too much commotion, but the douchebags just simply do what they do, and they do it in HK, I've seen HK people standing up to their behaviors. HK don't really tolerate douchebags, no matter whether you're from mainland China or US. (Well some people do demonstrate the typical "Asian don't want trouble" behavior, but people are getting more assertive already.)

3. I don't know where those weird assumptions you're bringing in near the end. No one thinks Americans save money.We rarely hear of White parents bringing their kids to pee in trash cans, but there's plenty of mainland Chinese visitors doing exactly that, getting caught, sometimes even recorded on camera, and when confronted, they spaz at others for attempting to correct them. There are even videos and instances of an adult woman peeing right outside Apple, taking a shit at those pot plants in malls. There are so much of these in HK, everyone knew. If you think people take event of SINGLE occurrences and cook it up, then you're right. Problem is, there are so many examples of recurrences, they turn into a conventional stereotype eventually. That's also why no one associate White people with taking a shit at inappropriate places, but do stereotype Whites as divorce often and "very open about sexuality". The same idea goes on towards India full of gang-rapes now, but then this is the result of media's selective stories on that matters after the famous incident last year. The recent kidnapped blind boy in China is an example: We rarely hear of something so cruel, even from China. That's why no one will associate China with gorging little boys' eyes out: it only happened once(thankfully), and people know it's some sick b!tch out there who did this. Normal people don't do that. I'm not saying stereotype is to be justified, but just explaining that stereotypes do not appear fictionally - there has to be something to create this in the first place, and it repeats. It's like a habit that gets conditioned.
And also why rich mainland Chinese gets thrown the light of them being arrogant, filthy, and rude is because that's exactly what some of them do. They display an arrogant attitude to pedestrians as they walk towards their Chanel or what not. They then drive a fancy Benz but wildly and when people accuse them of being reckless, they throw their tantrum back at people. And why it becomes an issue in HK is because many of them exhibit that behavior. People don't identify rich people automatically unless there's something to display, such as wearing brands and what not. This is why rich mainland Chinese are identified as being rude: they wear brands all over while going out and throwing attitudes - they give something for others to identify them with. Odds are, if you're Bill Gates but you don't wear anything fancy and don't demonstrate rude behavior, no one would think you're rich or rude or both.

Maybe you should turn around and think, if where you live, a group of people shows up doing certain things, eventually you will have reasons to start thinking their group does that. It would then be almost just as explainable as those who started to see certain mainland Chinese in a stereotypical view, although that doesn't mean it's right.

Mass moral panic? Plenty of Western backpackers were known for disrespecting their environment too. Hostel owners and tourist areas would know best. Stop giving me your assumptions that people permit Westerners.

I'm not sure where you're from, but I'm sick of hearing people just "standing up to defend China" for things they actually sometimes are responsible for, and then instead turning it on others. I mean, what's the point? Defend China? prove others wrong? Or to continuously reassure yourself that China is great utopia that everyone misunderstands? Honestly buddy, there are some things that does happen in China, and maybe it's better to acknowledge the problems and fix it instead of those standard defense that I'm so tired of hearing.

The saddest thing of all is you guys are defending people who deserves to be judged that way. And that, I mean those who are responsible for this impression they built for others. Others don't deserve that stereotype and it's unfair for them, but stereotypes do occur for a reason, and then it's for the ingroup to correct the behaviors of those guilty members, NOT defend them too and say others are accusing them. This is why "the West" gets China wrong: YOU GUYS. You guys just blindly defend all day, whether patriotism or whatever. To others, you're not acknowledging something people may see an issue with, and rather just display a bias that lets people feel people in China are just stubborn and refused to acknowledge their own problems. Why do you think some stereotypes stick longer than others? In a sense, it's starting to be true, because people like you guys are also the cause. By ignoring what's factual and problematic, that's like sticking your head in the dirt, while some others continue what they're doing. What difference is this from rednecks who maintain America is always right? Really? Any difference?

When bad things happen in China, in this forum, we don't see anyone discussing the problems, or addressing there's a legitimate concern. Instead you guys turned the focus ON the West like it's their fault. You guys started turning the spear on the West for focusing on these stories, while no one even discussed the issue at hand. Yes I do think the Western press is biased, but you guys are as well. Any difference from how some people in US, also the US government, turned the focus onto China during elections or when they run into unpopular events?

Finally, in HK, mainland Chinese tourists expects everyone to speak Mandarin to them, and some even shunned Cantonese. That's so goddamn disrespectful. It's fine if they can't speak Cantonese to us, as we can attempt to speak Mandarin...as people is about communicating with one another. Or even if the other way they attempt to try speaking Cantonese, we will actually appreciate them for trying. However, them asserting we have to speak to them in Mandarin, then that's completely arrogant. We are all equal. Them imposing us to speak their language is exerting their superiority or dominance on us.

These people always talk about nationalism and stuffs, but knows absolutely nothing about respecting others. In other words, thats ethnocentric arrogance, and the belief that others should serve them. Just as disgusting as those Americans who are arrogant and thinks the world revolves around them. NO difference. Seriously, that's not the real Chinese culture is about. Them being Chinese is an embarrassment to us all.
Not going to comment on every point from your many posts but my general impression is that you're making some assumptions over other people's statements too. For example I don't think the person you replied to was claiming people wrongly believe Americans saves money, rather that there's a biased image of Chinese mainlanders being vapid and materialistic despite most of them have much more savings than their American counterparts. So you missed the point there.

I do agree with you that most stereotype started from an actual trend that fits into that stereotype. Problem with stereotyping is that a trend is often greatly exaggerated, generalized, distorted, and then used as an excuse to discriminate against the whole group. I could be wrong, but I don't think some people here disagree with you just because you want to bring up the existence of these trends. I think the issue is with how you describe the problem. You tend to use the group to label the trend, if not using a trend to label the group, and I have to say the former is not much better than the latter, because they both generalizes. This could be a major trigger (rightly so) for people who feel that they have been unfairly represented by stereotypes and biases. On the other hand, judging from the many statements you made about Chinese tourists and other groups, perhaps you really feel it's justified to generalize a trend to some sub-group of Chinese people given the amount of "examples" you've seen on the media. Well I guess you have heard about confirmation bias and availability heuristics, but I doubt if you have truly grasp how powerful they could be in misguiding people's impression.

I get that you want to bring some balance to a bias, at least in number, towards pro-China statements here. This is a very reasonable desire. I believe it will be more effective if you make fewer assumptions about people here just trying to blindly defend China. Speculation on motivation can easily become flame bait and is hardly justifiable with reason. Instead you may want to recognize some of the valid points in the pro-China statements (unless you think every pro-China statements here were bullshit and wrong) and more importantly, recognize why there's a need for such voices in the media space. I think you know why, but the point is to show recognition instead of frustration towards it. You can't encourage people to do things your way if you first put them into an oppositional mood and never show understanding towards where they came from. And then you may better facilitate a conversation about the problems in China by being more precise and objective in placing your blames. Even if emotionally you feel some problematic behaviors put shame on all Chinese and we should all be introspective if not apologetic about them, keep in mind that's just a subjective perspective and not a universal rule. You may refer to my previous post on this.

Making an argument to express your own feelings is one thing, making an argument to change others is a whole different thing. But again, this is just my humble suggestion, ultimately you decide what you want to say and that's your right. If you just want to speak your mind and expect no more, that's fine too.

-----------------------------------------

p.s. I thought I have seen a mod notice somewhere that all political threads like this one will soon be closed and no more political discussion is allowed, no matter how respectful, informative, or educational they are? Or is that just my hallucination? If it's real, what a shame. Despite some bits and pieces of hostilities and frustrations, the atmosphere for discussion in general is much better here than most places on the Internet, there is much more depth too. But I guess it is very challenging for any mod to manage political discussions, and at its root this is a military forum.
 
Last edited:

Equation

Lieutenant General
All written by "Western reporters" eh? You have no idea you served yourself on a golden platter by saying words like these. If there's a bet placed on each of those 12 points I've mentioned as one pizza, that would be 12 pizzas you're buying for fellow members today. None of those 12 points came from the "Western media". They were all either accounts reported in HK papers, or individual accounts shared by others.
I think you should learn something, Equation. Don't speak words louder than what you're capable of. You not only make yourself look ridiculous, you're saying all things you have no chance of knowing or controlling.

Abuse from HK employers do happen, but is extremely rare, but of course, you're an "expert" on HK and pretty much any matters you have no problem of making a statement of, after all.
I've ignored pretty much the rest of what you've written because that's just more childish acts of name-calling and inaccurate statements.

Apparently you don't read other Western news sources like magazines, and online news sources. They do mentions all of those 12 points that you just described. Go look it up. If those sources came from HK papers or "individual accounts", whose to say their sources are not accurate or tend to over exaggerate the issues to convey the public that there's a problem that must be dealt with immediately. Have you ever question about the intent and purpose of those sources or are just going follow it like sheep?

How do you know the abuse of those HK employers are rare? Did you investigate and check them out yourself to make sure or is it because it was not on any HK papers therefore the problem is not as bad as people thought? Pinpointing others of screaming "the pot calling the kettle black" won't change their perspective on your hypocritical finger pointing. Now with that said, would that count as a Hong Kong problem or a Chinese problem?
 
Apparently you don't read other Western news sources like magazines, and online news sources. They do mentions all of those 12 points that you just described. Go look it up. If those sources came from HK papers or "individual accounts", whose to say their sources are not accurate or tend to over exaggerate the issues to convey the public that there's a problem that must be dealt with immediately. Have you ever question about the intent and purpose of those sources or are just going follow it like sheep?

How do you know the abuse of those HK employers are rare? Did you investigate and check them out yourself to make sure or is it because it was not on any HK papers therefore the problem is not as bad as people thought? Pinpointing others of screaming "the pot calling the kettle black" won't change their perspective on your hypocritical finger pointing. Now with that said, would that count as a Hong Kong problem or a Chinese problem?

I usually don't read their stuff to gain actual understanding of certain events happening in China. I just look at their opinions and see how far they had come towards their bias or to be neutral. The whole media issue towards China is something I recognized and agreed with you guys all along, and for recognizing that for so long, I'm already 80% immune to what mind-washing things the Western press has to throw at me in regarding China. When you know someone has a poor track record of being reliable about something, you don't really hold them to too much faith when they say something, and probably smart not to use them as the first place to get information.

As for exaggeration, I do give that as quite a possible thing..but some stories are not fabricated in the slightest sense. For example, those photos of a woman taking a sh!t in public, letting the kid urinate on the MTR, urinate in the garbage can..calling people discriminate them when it wasn't the issue, refuse to line up properly, pregnant moms, not respecting certain laws...those are ones where either there were actual statistics, recorded videos, or stuffs that I immediately can say are verifiable. Also, it didn't occur to you that some of these storie that the West reports actually came from HK first. And even in HK, I don't read everything. There's several newspapers and they are just biased stuff. I mainly stick to Ming Pao because it's the least of all evils, and probably one of the best there are. I also talked to my friend, who works at SCMP, regarding these issues, and we both agreed over the bias that HK has towards mainland Chinese. And Superdog is completely right, that's what I do in this forum: I do position myself as a counterbalance because of the bias atmosphere I felt. On MP.net I used to argue against all those racists over there, while on Facebook I also argued against HK racists. And on my own I don't really care who you are at all.
 
Not going to comment on every point from your many posts but my general impression is that you're making some assumptions over other people's statements too. For example I don't think the person you replied to was claiming people wrongly believe Americans saves money, rather that there's a biased image of Chinese mainlanders being vapid and materialistic despite most of them have much more savings than their American counterparts. So you missed the point there.

I do agree with you that most stereotype started from an actual trend that fits into that stereotype. Problem with stereotyping is that a trend is often greatly exaggerated, generalized, distorted, and then used as an excuse to discriminate against the whole group. I could be wrong, but I don't think some people here disagree with you just because you want to bring up the existence of these trends. I think the issue is with how you describe the problem. You tend to use the group to label the trend, if not using a trend to label the group, and I have to say the former is not much better than the latter, because they both generalizes. This could be a major trigger (rightly so) for people who feel that they have been unfairly represented by stereotypes and biases. On the other hand, judging from the many statements you made about Chinese tourists and other groups, perhaps you really feel it's justified to generalize a trend to some sub-group of Chinese people given the amount of "examples" you've seen on the media. Well I guess you have heard about confirmation bias and availability heuristics, but I doubt if you have truly grasp how powerful they could be in misguiding people's impression.

I get that you want to bring some balance to a bias, at least in number, towards pro-China statements here. This is a very reasonable desire. I believe it will be more effective if you make fewer assumptions about people here just trying to blindly defend China. Speculation on motivation can easily become flame bait and is hardly justifiable with reason. Instead you may want to recognize some of the valid points in the pro-China statements (unless you think every pro-China statements here were bullshit and wrong) and more importantly, recognize why there's a need for such voices in the media space. I think you know why, but the point is to show recognition instead of frustration towards it. You can't encourage people to do things your way if you first put them into an oppositional mood and never show understanding towards where they came from. And then you may better facilitate a conversation about the problems in China by being more precise and objective in placing your blames. Even if emotionally you feel some problematic behaviors put shame on all Chinese and we should all be introspective if not apologetic about them, keep in mind that's just a subjective perspective and not a universal rule. You may refer to my previous post on this.

Making an argument to express your own feelings is one thing, making an argument to change others is a whole different thing. But again, this is just my humble suggestion, ultimately you decide what you want to say and that's your right. If you just want to speak your mind and expect no more, that's fine too.

-----------------------------------------

p.s. I thought I have seen a mod notice somewhere that all political threads like this one will soon be closed and no more political discussion is allowed, no matter how respectful, informative, or educational they are? Or is that just my hallucination? If it's real, what a shame. Despite some bits and pieces of hostilities and frustrations, the atmosphere for discussion in general is much better here than most places on the Internet, there is much more depth too. But I guess it is very challenging for any mod to manage political discussions, and at its root this is a military forum.

Thank you so much Superdog. I read over once what you've written and I completely agree with you, and I accept what you've said of me, which is something I will keep in mind. You saw it through in me completely, that yes I do position myself as counterweight towards the pro-China numbers here. As we knew from groupthink and how the concentration of many people who thinks the same can cause the sentiment to multiply, I do fear on the bias that can influence deeper, and can affect judgement in longer term, so I do make myself speak in opposite for that manner.

As for the thread closing tonight, yes that's also why I make one last statement on this thread and hope to share some opposite light.
View regarding Chinese as big spenders is something I also disagree too. In fact it never came across to me the average Lee spends a lot. Average Chinese middle class is just like other middle class, if not more humble. It's just again, the extravaggent spenders who are the issues, and they are the rich ones, not the regular Chinese.

As for the pro-China writers' thoughts, I mean I agree with them like 89% of the time on the valid points they have made.When I started in this forum, I took their stances too and been one of them for a very long time. However these days as I begin to have more exposure to other things (for better and for worse), I begin to see the issue is much less about blaming the other side now. China's gonna have to do something about existing problems because even if most Chinese are decent folks and they are, that doesn't mean problems that are existent should be ignored. I do feel sometimes they either think too much, thought too sinister of others as having an evil intent, or sometimes even exaggerated a bit on the responsibilities others have...and they really did rarely seemed to acknowledge there's something wrong with China too.


And thanks for your suggestions once again Superdog. Thanks for the reminder. I will keep myself more aware of what you've pointed out, and will pay closer attention. I will reply a bit more tonight about this as I got to get prepared for a marriage I'm attending this afternoon.
 

superdog

Junior Member
There's several newspapers and they are just biased stuff. I mainly stick to Ming Pao because it's the least of all evils, and probably one of the best there are. I also talked to my friend, who works at SCMP, regarding these issues, and we both agreed over the bias that HK has towards mainland Chinese.
Personally I don't see Ming Pao as the least of all evils, at least not when it comes to mainland-related news and commentary. In reporting these issues they do have a strong agenda and bias not dissimilar to that of many western media, this will affect what and how they choose to report. I found that some other newspapers like Singtao tend to have better neutrality in this area, although no one is perfect. However Ming Pao does identify itself as a "serious" newspaper so it is unlikely for them to do made-up or extremely sensational news stories, which the various tabloids sometimes does. They also have more in-depth political and social content than other newspapers. I feel that some of their editors do want to be the voice of progression and change HK/China for the better, but their perspective and vision didn't deviate much from "the West" in the title of this thread so they subject to many of the same limitation and biases.

Then again, all media has some levels of agenda, some altruistic and some 'evil', but nonetheless agenda. I still read or watch many different news sources including CCP mouthpieces and western media, knowing that there will be bias but also meaningful information. We can't be a perfectionist in getting information, we can only be a skeptic.
 
Last edited:

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
I'm going to get back to you on this one because I needed to sleep, but I do need to point out, I think you're confusing identity. How North Americans see us is one thing. They see us all as Asians, and that we all look the same..but that doesn't mean we are. There's various types of Asians, as there are various types of Chinese. Sure, Shanghainese, Sichuanese are still Chinese, but they are their own distinct types, and they deserved to be distinguished as it's only respectful of their group identity and who they are. Same idea goes for HK, China, and Taiwan, and why HK won't want to be mistaken as Taiwanese etc. Sure you can say they are all still Chinese, but if you just see "Chinese and that's all it matters" then you sweep them all under one category and ignore the distinct groups and cultures within, then you're not respecting their uniqueness and I'm afraid that will just cause actually more intergroup conflicts than solve them. Groups wants to always be recognized as who they represent or how they want to be seen, even if they know they are still part of a bigger group. This respect of who they are is important to who they are, and it's something that deserves to be acknowledged. I know you're talking about assimilation in a sense because that's what US is about, but underneath assimilation there will always be divisions, subgroups, units, etc. This is actual social psychological stuff.

In a simpler example, yes your brother, you, your sister, are all from the same family. You all would consider yourself Changs, but if I come and say "Yea you're all Changs, so it doesn't matter which one is which" and just call you Chang from now on and the same about your siblings and don't even address you by your first name, then you will feel I'm extremely disrespectful. I don't mean to refer to your family personally as example, so I hope you don't mind, as I don't mean to be insulting or offensive. I do apologize in advance if you feel uncomfortable with this example, my apologies.

Yeah but people from Hong Kong are trying to create their own identity by distinguishing themselves from Mainlanders by what? Bad behavior. You can point out bad behavior all you want. My whole problem has been Hong Kongers have been guilty of it much longer. So they can't really distinguish an identity by pointing out bad behavior as a difference because that's the only thing Hong Kongers have been using as to distinguish their identity to which I've pointed out they're guilty of it too. What happens if a Hong Konger displays bad behavior somewhere? All Hong Kongers have to do is say they're from the Mainland which I have seen done many of times.

I would advise not to use generalizations to attack other generalizations. If you don't intent to accept (neither do I) criticisms that use individual instances of bad behaving Chinese tourists to blame Chinese people as a whole, than you may want to think twice before putting labels on "people from Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore". It is okay and important to point out that similar behaviors existed in other demographics and that there is confirmation bias involved in the hype of characterizing certain bad behaviors as "Chinese" or "Mainland-Chinese" in nature. This is why I like this thread as people like you stand out to identify the hypocrisy in the air. But in doing so I think we should refrain from using the same bias we criticize to put blame on other groups as a whole. Even if the intent is to disprove by contradiction -- "give them a taste of their own medicine", this is not a very productive way to make our views understandable and convincing. After all, how can we ask others to view a "bad behaving Chinese tourist" as it is and not as "the bad behaving Chinese people", if we don't do it ourselves when we judge other groups of Non-Mainland-Chinese?

It should be noted that I'm not asking anyone to never identify trends and only see everything as incidental individual actions, that would be in denial too; but still, a trend, if it really exist, is what it is: a pattern of behaviors done by a certain percentage of people facilitated by certain environmental factors. In most cases, this is still not justifiable as a characteristic inherent to any race, ethnic, or cultural groups of people; it still makes no sense to put collective moral burden on those who belongs to the same group but didn't engage or encourage the particular behavior. So, we should take care in formulating our statements to reduce the chance of them being interpreted as such a label or moral accusation. Don't forget that our language affects our cognition, by being more careful in making statements we will also become less susceptible to biases and stereotypes ourselves.

BTW, this is not just a comment on your post, but equally to airsuperiority as well.

Well then you didn't understand my point. I'm generalizing because Mainland Chinese are being generalized and grouped together. And sometimes the best way to get your message across to show how wrong the other side's logic is flawed is by using them in the same context.
 
Last edited:

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Not going to comment on every point from your many posts but my general impression is that you're making some assumptions over other people's statements too. For example I don't think the person you replied to was claiming people wrongly believe Americans saves money, rather that there's a biased image of Chinese mainlanders being vapid and materialistic despite most of them have much more savings than their American counterparts. So you missed the point there.

I do agree with you that most stereotype started from an actual trend that fits into that stereotype. Problem with stereotyping is that a trend is often greatly exaggerated, generalized, distorted, and then used as an excuse to discriminate against the whole group. I could be wrong, but I don't think some people here disagree with you just because you want to bring up the existence of these trends. I think the issue is with how you describe the problem. You tend to use the group to label the trend, if not using a trend to label the group, and I have to say the former is not much better than the latter, because they both generalizes. This could be a major trigger (rightly so) for people who feel that they have been unfairly represented by stereotypes and biases. On the other hand, judging from the many statements you made about Chinese tourists and other groups, perhaps you really feel it's justified to generalize a trend to some sub-group of Chinese people given the amount of "examples" you've seen on the media. Well I guess you have heard about confirmation bias and availability heuristics, but I doubt if you have truly grasp how powerful they could be in misguiding people's impression.

I get that you want to bring some balance to a bias, at least in number, towards pro-China statements here. This is a very reasonable desire. I believe it will be more effective if you make fewer assumptions about people here just trying to blindly defend China. Speculation on motivation can easily become flame bait and is hardly justifiable with reason. Instead you may want to recognize some of the valid points in the pro-China statements (unless you think every pro-China statements here were bullshit and wrong) and more importantly, recognize why there's a need for such voices in the media space. I think you know why, but the point is to show recognition instead of frustration towards it. You can't encourage people to do things your way if you first put them into an oppositional mood and never show understanding towards where they came from. And then you may better facilitate a conversation about the problems in China by being more precise and objective in placing your blames. Even if emotionally you feel some problematic behaviors put shame on all Chinese and we should all be introspective if not apologetic about them, keep in mind that's just a subjective perspective and not a universal rule. You may refer to my previous post on this.

Making an argument to express your own feelings is one thing, making an argument to change others is a whole different thing. But again, this is just my humble suggestion, ultimately you decide what you want to say and that's your right. If you just want to speak your mind and expect no more, that's fine too.

-----------------------------------------

p.s. I thought I have seen a mod notice somewhere that all political threads like this one will soon be closed and no more political discussion is allowed, no matter how respectful, informative, or educational they are? Or is that just my hallucination? If it's real, what a shame. Despite some bits and pieces of hostilities and frustrations, the atmosphere for discussion in general is much better here than most places on the Internet, there is much more depth too. But I guess it is very challenging for any mod to manage political discussions, and at its root this is a military forum.

The only thing being used by those who separate their identity is bad behavior. Do they have anything else to separate their identity? The only thing people in Hong Kong can use is their British connection. So they have the British and supposedly good manners to separate themselves. But they along with others outside the Mainland are the ones who started this stereotype because like I said Mainland tourism is a recent event. So let's eliminate bad behavior as a difference and all Hong Kong has left is British history in Hong Kong. Hong Kong was a little fishing village before the British took over. Are Hong Kongers today majority descendants of those villagers? Nope. So again the only distinction is the British. Are we suppose to believe the British taught good behavior? No, because again Mainland Chinese tourism is a recent event and the stereotypes have been around much longer. It's a hot button issue because bad behavior stereotypes are the only thing Hong Kongers have been using to separate their identity but they were one of the forefathers of it. That's pretty hypocritical especially since they put so much into it.


BTW, worried about this thread being closed? It's August 31st. By tomorrow all these threads will be closed if you haven't read the notice.
 
Last edited:

Quickie

Colonel
Yeah but people from Hong Kong are trying to create their own identity by distinguishing themselves from Mainlanders by what? Bad behavior. You can point out bad behavior all you want. My whole problem has been Hong Kongers have been guilty of it much longer. So they can't really distinguish an identity by pointing out bad behavior as a difference because that's the only thing Hong Kongers have been using as to distinguish their identity to which I've pointed out they're guilty of it too. What happens if a Hong Konger displays bad behavior somewhere? All Hong Kongers have to do is say they're from the Mainland which I have seen done many of times.



Well then you didn't understand my point. I'm generalizing because Mainland Chinese are being generalized and grouped together. And sometimes the best way to get your message across to show how wrong the other side's logic is flawed is by using them in the same context.

I agree with the gist of your point. I guess at the same time we also can't generalise all Hong Kongers are conceited in that way.
 

superdog

Junior Member
Well then you didn't understand my point. I'm generalizing because Mainland Chinese are being generalized and grouped together. And sometimes the best way to get your message across to show how wrong the other side's logic is flawed is by using them in the same context.
In that case I did understand you point. I mentioned precisely that in my post and my thought is "this is not a very productive way to make our views understandable and convincing". I guess it may work sometimes but I don't think it worked very well here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top