Wednesday, December 28, 2011

共产与纳粹的比较 Why Doesn't Communism Have as Bad a Name as Nazism?

共产的邪恶 The Evil of Communism

Mao's Statue in the Nixon Library, California 尼克松图书馆中的毛塑像


陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

普瑞格尔(Dennis Prager)的这篇文章分析了为什么今天在世界上人们仍不认知共产的邪恶,甚至对共产邪念抱有幻梦。 我希望人们能在这篇文章中对邪恶的力量与人们的道德混乱有清晰与足够的认识。

Dennis Prager's article analyzes why today people in the world, especially those of left-leaning in the West, still have illusions about communism and still cannot come to term with the evil of communism. I only hope people read this article and start thinking deeply about this crucial issue of our time.

Why Doesn't Communism Have as Bad a Name as Nazism?

By: Dennis Prager | Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Why is it that when people want to describe particularly evil individuals or regimes, they use the terms "Nazi" or "Fascist" but almost never "Communist?"

Given the amount the human suffering Communists have caused - 70 million killed in China, 20-30 million in the former Soviet Union, and almost one-third of all Cambodians; the decimation of Tibetan and Chinese culture; totalitarian enslavement of North Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese, and Russians; a generation deprived of human rights in Cuba; and much more -- why is "Communist" so much less a term of revulsion than "Nazi?"

There are Mao Restaurants in major cities in the Western world. Can one imagine Hitler Restaurants? Che Guevara T-shirts are ubiquitous, yet there are no Heinrich Himmler T-shirts.

This question is of vital significance. First, without moral clarity, humanity has little chance of avoiding a dark future. Second, the reasons for this moral imbalance tell us a great deal about ourselves today.

Here, then, are seven reasons.

1.Communists murdered their own people; the Nazis murdered others.

Under Mao about 70 million people died - nearly all in peacetime! - virtually all of them Chinese. Likewise, the approximately 30 million people that Stalin had killed were nearly all Russians, and those who were not Russian, Ukrainians for example, were members of other Soviet nationalities. The Nazis, on the other hand, killed very few fellow Germans. Their victims were Jews, Slavs, and members of other "non-Aryan" and "inferior" groups. "World opinion" - that vapid amoral concept - deems the murder of members of one's group far less noteworthy than the murder of outsiders. That is one reason why blacks killing millions of fellow blacks in the Congo right now elicits no attention from "world opinion." But if an Israeli soldier is charged with having killed a Gaza woman and two children, it makes the front page of world newspapers.

2.Communism is based on lovely sounding theories; Nazism is based on heinous sounding theories.

Intellectuals, among whom are the people who write history, are seduced by words -- so much so that deeds are deemed considerably less significant. Communism's words are far more intellectually and morally appealing than the moronic and vile racism of Nazism. The monstrous evils of communists have not been focused on nearly as much as the monstrous deeds of the Nazis. The former have been regularly dismissed as perversions of a beautiful doctrine (though Christians who committed evil in the name of Christianity are never regarded by these same people as having perverted a beautiful doctrine), whereas Nazi atrocities have been perceived (correctly) as the logical and inevitable results of Nazi ideology. This seduction by words while ignoring deeds has been a major factor in the ongoing appeal of the left to intellectuals. How else explain the appeal of a Che Guevara or Fidel Castro to so many left-wing intellectuals, other than that they care more about beautiful words than about vile deeds?

3.Germans have thoroughly exposed the evils of Nazism, have taken responsibility for them, and attempted to atone for them. Russians have not done anything similar regarding Lenin's or Stalin's horrors.

Indeed, an ex-KGB man runs Russia, Lenin is still widely revered, and, in the words of University of London Russian historian Donald Rayfield, "people still deny by assertion or implication, Stalin's holocaust." Nor has China in any way exposed the greatest mass murderer and enslaver of them all, Mao Zedong. Mao remains revered in China. Until Russia and China acknowledge the evil their states have done under communism, communism's evils will remain less acknowledged by the world than the evils of the German state under Hitler.

4.Communism won, Nazism lost. And the winners write history.

5.Nothing matches the Holocaust.

The rounding up of virtually every Jewish man, woman, child, and baby on the European continent and sending them to die is unprecedented and unparalleled. The communists killed far more people than the Nazis did but never matched the Holocaust in the systemization of murder. The uniqueness of the Holocaust and the enormous attention paid to it since then has helped ensure that Nazism has a worse name than communism.

6.There is, simply put, widespread ignorance of communist atrocities compared to those of the Nazis.

Whereas, both right and left loathe Nazism and teach its evil history, the left dominates the teaching profession, and therefore almost no one teaches communist atrocities. As much as intellectuals on the left may argue that they loathe Stalin or the North Korean regime, few on the left loathe communism. As the French put it, "pas d'enemis a la gauche," which in English means "no enemies on the left." This is certainly true of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Cuban communism. Check your local university's courses and see how many classes are given on communist totalitarianism or mass murder compared to the number of classes about Nazism's immoral record.

7.Finally, in the view of the left, the last "good war" America fought was World War II, the war against German and Japanese fascism.

The left does not regard America's wars against communist regimes as good wars. The war against Vietnamese communism is regarded as immoral and the war against Korean (and Chinese) communism is simply ignored.

Until the left and all the institutions influenced by the left acknowledge how evil communism has been, we will continue to live in a morally confused world. Conversely, the day the left does come to grips with communism's legacy of human destruction, it will be a very positive sign that the world's moral compass has begun to correct itself.


Dennis Prager hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show based in Los Angeles. He is the author of four books, most recently "Happiness is a Serious Problem" (HarperCollins). His website is To find out more about Dennis Prager, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at

Monday, December 26, 2011

Kai Chen on Mao's images in America and the World 陈凯论毛像对美国/西方的危害

Kai Chen on Mao's images in America and the World 陈凯论毛像对美国/西方/世界的危害

Mao's statue in the Nixon Library 尼克松图书馆中的毛塑像

Kai Chen and Wei Jingsheng on Mao's Evil Image and the Communist Infiltration (Video Link):


Destruction of Mao’s Image is a Must

Devil Worship in China Leads to Vicious Dynastic Cycles

“Free Beings” vs. “Chinese”

By Kai Chen 陈凯 (Written 3/15/2011, Reprint 7/29/2011)

从秦始皇到毛泽东,“中国人”崇魔、尊鬼、信邪的病态扭曲导致了一个无限恶性循环的“朝代圈”。 这个邪恶虚无的“朝代圈”是由无信仰、无自由、无尊严、无正义感的人们自编、自进、自欺、自逃而建立的。 同时这个邪恶虚无的“朝代圈”又反过来将一代又一代的“中国人”奴役扭曲为“为社、为皇、为群、为族、为大家”的无灵自阉的“宦奴娼”。 “默默的绝望”是所有以虚为荣、以欺为尚、以奴为耀的“中国人”的必然心态。

大多“中国人”都认为人是环境、文化、祖宗、教育、政府的造物,而不是上苍的创造,不是有自由意志的存在。 他们看不到西方/美国的“人”是“上苍之下,上苍所创”的真实主动的存在,而“中国人”则是“皇政之下”的“祖先圣人”所灌养出来的虚无被动的“奴”,是一个“被权利用”的工具与可有可无的数字。 这就是为什么那些做着“人上人”的“中国梦”的人们到头来总会发现他们几千年来的“奴主梦”不过是一个人吃人的噩梦罢了。

许多我过去的朋友同仁也都认为“稳定”、“和谐”、“繁荣”、“富强”是“中国特色”基于族群观念的价值,“不同于”西方/美国的基于个体的普世永恒 的人的价值 – 真实、正义、自由、尊严。 由此他们都认为秦始皇、毛泽东的遗产与形象是一定要褒扬与保护的,是不能没贬辍与销毁的。 “没有秦、毛,中国就会大乱的。” 他们对真实个体价值的恐惧与对未来未知的逃避是他们自身奴役感、无奈感与绝望感的真实来源。 我实想象不出如果今天意大利的人们仍旧将凯撒作为楷模去效仿,或德国的人们仍旧将希特勒作为偶像去崇拜,或俄国的人们仍旧将斯大林作为榜样去追求,世界会是个什么样子。

“崇魔拜权”所导致的一时稳定与强权只能带来噩梦一般的灾难性后果: 纳粹德国、军国日本、共产苏俄都是这种“崇魔文化”所造成的噩梦。 中国的“共奴儒粹”的党朝将毛泽东的魔像顶礼膜拜作为它的强权合法的基点,其必然的噩梦般结局也是可以预见的。 “崇魔”的人们是“无灵毁灵”的人们。 “中国人”今天的不识真假,不辨是非,不论正邪,不讲对错就是这些无灵自阉的“宦奴娼”的真实写照。 在电影“魔戒”(Lord of the Ring) 中,西方/美国的价值文化是要销毁那个象征强权的魔戒,并杜绝它在人们中的邪恶影响与作用。 而“中国人”却一味迷恋、追求去拥有那个象征强权的魔戒,并将曾经拥有那魔戒的魔鬼们如秦始皇与毛泽东作为偶像、伪神去崇拜。 中国专制文化(腐儒毛共)的反价值就此暴露无遗。

毛像林立、毛钞泛滥、毛语横行、毛尸咒人的今日中国是一个噩梦末日即将到来的垂死党朝。 这犹如一个胭脂遍体的染着艾滋病与梅毒的妓女妄图要用与她上床的人们的众多来证实自身的价值,或一个金粉遍体的泥菩萨试图用跪拜人们的众多来证实它的泥身是真金一样。 真假、是非、正邪、好坏是绝不能用人数多少、强权财富、武力威吓、谎言欺骗而确定的。 有毛像处定无人灵。 有共产处定无正义。 有腐儒处定无尊严。 有强权处定无是非。 有专制处定无自由。 有“中国人”处定无进步与真实。


Tuesday, December 20, 2011

中国广东乌坎村的不寻常抗争 China's Wukan Seige

China's Wukan Seige:
 Could Beijing Resort to Force with Escalating Social Unrest?

Wukan villagers with protest banners demanding justice from Beijing for the land cheated out of them  (Source: The Telegraph)


By Stratfor Global Intelligence

China Director Jennifer Richmond discusses the recent protests in Wukan, Guangdong province, and the characteristics that set them apart from previous incidents of social unrest in China. (Watch CNN news video below covering Wukan protests added by EconMatters)

After months of protests in the village of Wukan in Guangdong province, which started on Sept. 21, the situation escalated this weekend when one of the protest leaders died in custody. Authorities have blockaded the village in an attempt to control the situation while a solution is worked out. As China’s economy slows dissatisfaction grows proportionately and we expect even more incidents in the future.

Reports on Dec. 14 indicate the village cadres — many of whom left Wukan in November as the protests continued and are now suspected of violating discipline —are being held by the Lufeng City Commission.

A common tactic in these protests is to seek provincial or central government intervention. The slow reaction to the protests only lead to an escalation, which is now trying to be redressed with both a show of force and some sort of conciliation to villager demands.

The protests in Wukan began months ago when the Fengtian Livestock company and Country Garden collaborated to use disputed land for development. The villagers claimed the land for their agricultural uses.

This is just one of many protests involving land grabs that have been heightened over the past few years as a result of China’s real estate boom and urbanization, which local governments rely on to boost their incomes.

So why is this one any different? There are several things about this protest that have caught our attention.

First, the duration. The villagers have maintained these protests for over several months. Usually these protests die down when local officials are able to buy off a handful of people or strike some sort of negotiation.

Second, the numbers. Although the protesters themselves only amount to a thousand or so citizens, the entire village of approximately 20,000 appears united in its stance against the local government.

And third, the response. The protests lead to the retreat of village officials and the cordoning off of the entire village from any ingoing or outgoing traffic. Although we’ve seen this tactic employed at least once before in Zhejiang province, it is not common and therefore notable.

As we’ve always stated before, many of these protests are local and can be contained locally. Ultimately they pose little threat to the central government. However, we’ve noted several incidents, including the recent protests over a factory in Dalian, where the local government has capitulated to citizen demands.

People look to Beijing to intervene against corrupt local officials, and Beijing is often able to shield itself from criticism by setting itself apart from local governments that are most often the targets of social unrest.

As China’s economy slows — and we are witnessing a rapidly slowing economy as Europe’s economic turmoil affects China’s exports — protests increase and put increasing pressure on Beijing to manage local uprisings with dwindling economic resources.

As similar protests occur throughout the country, and if they demonstrate the same level of solidarity as in Wukan, Beijing will be forced to respond and will do so through a mixture of force and incentives.

If Beijing mishandles these protests — and the margin for error increases as the protests expand and become more united — the focus could turn to the central government. Further, if protest tactics are able to increasingly force a favorable response for the citizens, they become emboldened. In the end, Beijing will not hesitate to resort to force, especially if the mandate of the Chinese Communist Party comes into question.

EconMatters Note: Wukan Village reportedly has become self-governed and completely outside of the central government's control after the villagers kicked out the last government official on 12 Dec. This is totally unprecedented since Mao took over the Mainland in 1949. 

Wukan is a fishing village of approximately 20,000, and has now been cut off food, electricity, and half of the water supplies. British paper the Telegraph so far was the only foreign media managed to send a reporter into the village and described the Party has lost all control in a situation of open revolt. Any news about Wukan is heavily censored by China's Great Firewall.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

陈凯访谈/中国党朝的体育之病态 The Perversion of China's Sports

【禁闻】中国足球落后与举国体制因果论 China's Sports Perversion


The Perversion of China's Sports

Youtube link:














新唐人记者陈汉 宋风 肖颜 采访报导

Friday, December 9, 2011

只有“人性”的原弊,而绝无“民族性”的逃避 “Human Nature/Sin and Potential” vs. “China’s People Race”

Chinese Kneeling to Others 中国人向人下跪


“Human Nature/Sin and Potential” vs. “China’s People Race”

人的“原弊”与“伟大的可能” vs. “群体的逃避”与“朝代循环”

“Free Beings” vs. “Chinese” Series

By Kai Chen 陈凯 12/9/2011

许多中国人常常将“民族”与“民族性”(People Race--一个极为病态与怪诞的伪概念)挂在嘴边,使人觉得他们是在用一个根本不能定义的伪词汇为某个他们每一个人都想逃脱而又无法逃脱的东西喷雾水。 说到底,“中国人”似乎永远都在渴望着用群体来逃避个体,用“民族性”来逃避“人性”(Human Nature)中的原弊 (Sin)与人性中的,在上苍的道德指引下的,发掘的潜力与人的伟大的可能(Possibilities and Potentials)。

人(Human)不可能成为神(God)。 人不可能摆脱自身的原弊(Sin)与“不完美”(Fallibility)。 因此人也绝不应该去寻找/试图建立什么完美社会,或仰望/期待什么完美的人间“救星”(Human Agencies)去解决人间的问题。 基督精神对人性的真实解义与西方的自由理念基此而产生的社会科学造成了今天我们所见的自由社会(绝不完美但永远向前并挑战未知的“创造性”社会)。 道德的绝对(好与坏、真与假,是与非,对与错,正义与邪恶的区分)是指引这些自由社会的基点与指南。 “分权”,“司法独立”,“新闻、言论、宗教信仰、结社集会等等自由/权利”就逻辑地与自然地成为自由社会的,抑制人性中的“原弊”的必要手段与安排。 人性中的对“真实、正义、自由、尊严”的渴望与追求也就因此得到褒扬与扩展。 一个不断向前、不断创新、不断摈弃人的“鬼性与奴性”的、不断接近人的“伟大的潜力”的、充满活力的但“绝不可能完美的”道德/自由社会就此形成。 爱、希望与进步便由于这种有真实信仰的“自由人”对人性中原弊的承认与对人性的真实面对成为现实(Reality)。

“人性”中有基于人的原弊(Sin)的“鬼性”与“奴性”,也有基于“尊崇上苍”的“神性”与“人的伟大(Greatness)”。 不承认人的“原弊”而产生的“人可以成为神”的病态幻觉导致了中国的人们对“完美的专制”的憧憬与对“人间上帝/救星”的渴望与期待。 每一个杀人无数的中国的王朝就是这种对“完美的专制/人间天堂”的病态向往而产生的。 “跪人”而“不跪神”就是这些拒绝人性的“不完美”与拒绝真实的信仰的中国的人们外在的行为规范。 基督精神中的“只跪神”而“绝不跪人”的道德准则是与中国的人们的病态言行相反的道德/自由社会的基点。

只有承认人的“原弊”才有可能承认人有“进步”与“实现自身伟大”的可能。 (幻觉能成神的人也逻辑地表明他们可以消灭“原弊”的方式去拒绝个体自由与选择。 因此 否认与消灭人的“原弊”也就必然否认与消灭了“人可以自由与不断进步”的可能。 “能成神”的“中国人”就此造成了一个又一个的“僵死不前”的“自命为人间天堂”的专制王朝。 窒息人性的“尿盆、粪坑、酱缸文化”就此成为“中国人”最习惯的常态。 中国的人们在“温暖发酵”的儒家“中庸”的粪坑中成为了“他人粪便中”的蛆虫,成为了“既吃不好/吃不饱也饿不死”的奴才。 说到底“屎虼螂文化”就是否认“人的原弊”与“人的伟大”的“人能成神”(通过“枪杆子/暴力与修身养性/向善”)的畸形心态的鲜明写照。

为了逃避每一个个体的原弊、每一个个体伟大的可能与每一个个体选择的责任与必须承担的后果,“中国人”就不遗余力地寻找/制造逃避真实“人性”的各种理念与语言词汇。 从儒学孔教到马列主义,从秦始皇到毛泽东,从传统专制奴役到社会主义/共产主义的暴政, 从“拥共崇毛”的狂热到迷恋“繁荣富强“的当代民族主义,“中国人”在“尿盆”,“粪坑”与让人绝望的“朝代泥潭”中滚动杀戮了几千年。 蛔虫、蛆虫、屎虼螂就是这“永恒杀戮”所必然衍生的产物与怪胎。 “人性”中的原弊与人的伟大的可能被“中国人”抛到九霄云外。 “民族”与“民族性”(蛔虫性、蛆虫性、屎虼螂性)成了人们的口头禅。 个体的生命、自由与尊严一次又一次地被泯灭。 “人”再一次在伟大的“民族复兴”中成为了专制奴役牺牲品与工具。 人的“鬼性与奴性”再一次得到了认同,扩大与褒扬。 又一个崇尚杀戮的“新王朝”正在即将到来的“共后”时代被中国的人们孕育着。 只要看一看今天的埃及或伊朗的“革命”(伊斯兰王朝的复兴)与世界上举不胜举的“杀人王朝循环”的例子,你就会懂得今天的中国正在走向何处。

“民族性”、“民族情感”、“民族利益”、“民族大业”、“民族精神”、“民族崛起”等等大量的伪词汇是今天中国的人们逃避“真实人性”的遁词,是“善走捷径”的“中国人”逃避个体自由与选择的病态人的畸形心态写照。 请记住: 那些高谈“民族”、“民族性”、“民族情结”的人们说轻了是在卖狗皮膏药,说重了是在贩毒与吃人。 他们与孔儒,秦皇与毛共一样,都是寄生在他人身上的“吸血鬼”(Vampires)与吃人肉的“活死人”(Zombies)罢了。

我的忠告: 离那些常将“民族”与“中华”挂在嘴头上的人远一点。

Kai Chen Interview on "Human Rights"

Click "Listening to Program" to hear the interview.




Tuesday, December 6, 2011

中国经济濒临崩盘 China is Going Down

China's Ghost Cities 中国的“鬼城”

China's central bank in Beijing cut the reserve requirement ratio for its banks on Nov. 30 for the first time in nearly three years to ease credit strains and shore up activity in the world's second-largest economy. /Reuters/Soo Hoo Zheyang


China was going to save the global economy? Guess again

Sol W. Sanders

Creeping up on the outer edges of Wall Street soothsayers’ economic crystal ball, until now dominated by American and Euro crises, is growing concern about China.

The inane idea China [and India, which is also in trouble] would somehow rescue the world economy is now, finally, dismissed by the pundits — without apologies. How a largely export-led, mercantilist economy was to save the world with its principle markets in the U.S. and the EU winnowing down was never explained. Continued wishful references to Chinese leadership’s equally improbable promises to boost domestic consumption are also falling away.

There is, in fact, a growing consensus the Chinese economy is spiraling down. One respected Hong Kong economist, Ms. Wang Tao of UBS, is predicting a gross domestic growth [GDP] rate toward 7 percent before year’s end. That’s below the red line 8 percent long considered by the double-domes as the minimum to satisfy jobs for China’s growing population.

Soon we can hope to hear an end to those straight-line projections — so wrong two decades ago in Japan predictions — which take China’s current world No. 2 GDP to soaring heights. Indeed, China is the classic example of inadequacies of GDP as an economic barometer. Even assuming official figures are reliable — which is a far stretch — China’s GDP has inflated with vast over expansion of infrastructure and massive corruption indicating enormous activity but not necessarily a basis for continued stability and growth. [Remember Euroland’s GDP/consumption figures before the fall!] Nor do we have more than a notional figure for huge military outlays.

Granted, some of us who have been predicting a China crash for years, arguing its miraculous transformation was jerrybuilt. But we have always said what would trip the fall, when, and how the Chinese would cope with it, is unpredictable — as so many things in life. Some full-time observers are now turning to the banking structure as chief concern. Whether you look at inadequacies of Communist Party decision makers in their see-saw battle to maintain maximum growth but head off any hint of inflation, a traditional Chinese destroyer of dynasties, the outlook is grim.

Larry Lang, a Hong Kong TV personality and Chinese University professor of finance, recently labeled provincial finances as “China’s many Greeces”. Beijing’s writ — as an old proverb goes — ends no longer at the village gate but increasingly at the provincial capital where regional authorities defy the center, desperate to meet growing resources demands.

Local politicos have wheedled, persuaded, bribed and threatened local government banks into credit far beyond their capacity to repay. Add that to the huge stock of non-performing loans banks give their Party buddies in the huge inefficient government companies and you have what could be the mother of all financial fiascos.

Just as politics does not end at the banks’ doors, the Communist Party is moving into a generational leadership succession year. In theory, the new president and prime minister have been anointed. But there is a lot of shin-kicking with the usual Communist turn to so-called ideological arguments masking personality, regional and purely economic interests.

A kind of neo-Maoism has surfaced. And it could take on new life as economic problems deepen because there has always been a strong Party constituency for preserving Soviet controls, planning and government ownership. Never mind that the fabled Chinese entrepreneurial spirit has taken hold with the partial liberalization of the past two decades. But much of this private sector with its disproportionately higher productivity was exports now hit hard with the downturn in the U.S. and Europe.

This has collapsed thousands of private businesses, particularly in South China’s clothing and gizmo assembly operations, leading to dramatic literal disappearances of owners and managers and growing unemployment. This, in turn, has fed already escalating unrest; Beijing has stopped reporting even the very suspect official figures.

It’s early on, of course, to predict this would develop into the kind of provincial disintegration bringing down virtually every China ruling dynasty through its long history. Still….

Meanwhile, China’s drop in demand for raw materials is already hitting world commodity markets — iron ore, for example, and soon to be coal and soya. That will have its effects on the overseas suppliers from Angola to Brazil to Australia [which has already seen a 10 percent drop in its high-flying dollar of a few weeks ago.]


Sol W. Sanders, (, writes the ‘Follow the Money’ column for The Washington Times on the convergence of international politics, business and economics. He is also a contributing editor for and

Friday, December 2, 2011

中共党朝的老子与太子 WSJ/Children of the Revolution

Children of the Revolution 中共的太子党

“红歌王”薄熙来与太子薄瓜瓜 Bo Xilai, with his son, at a memorial ceremony held for his father in Beijing, in 2007.


陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words: 
“太子党”现象只说明了一个真实:中共就是中国。 如果说现在还有人否认中共与中国专制文化/王朝的必然联系,那他不是一个白痴就是一个骗子。

"The Princelings" phenomenon only demonstrates an undeniable truth: China's Communist Party-Dynasty has deep roots in Chinese despotic mindset/tradition. Chinese Party-Dynasty is no question founded on the traditional Chinese despotism. Chinese communist party is China indeed. If now someone still has doubts on this point, then he/she is either a moron or a man-eating monster.
Children of the Revolution

China's 'princelings,' the offspring of the communist party elite, are embracing the trappings of wealth and privilege—raising uncomfortable questions for their elders..

By JEREMY PAGE -- Wall Street Journal

One evening early this year, a red Ferrari pulled up at the U.S. ambassador's residence in Beijing, and the son of one of China's top leaders stepped out, dressed in a tuxedo.

(Grandfather, Bo Yibo — Helped lead Mao's forces to victory, only to be purged in the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution. Subsequently rehabilitated.

Son, Bo Guagua — Graduate student at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

Father, Bo Xilai — Party secretary of Chongqing and Politburo member, likely to rise to the Politburo standing committee in 2012.)

Bo Guagua, 23, was expected. He had a dinner appointment with a daughter of the then-ambassador, Jon Huntsman.

The car, though, was a surprise. The driver's father, Bo Xilai, was in the midst of a controversial campaign to revive the spirit of Mao Zedong through mass renditions of old revolutionary anthems, known as "red singing." He had ordered students and officials to work stints on farms to reconnect with the countryside. His son, meanwhile, was driving a car worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and as red as the Chinese flag, in a country where the average household income last year was about $3,300.

The episode, related by several people familiar with it, is symptomatic of a challenge facing the Chinese Communist Party as it tries to maintain its legitimacy in an increasingly diverse, well-informed and demanding society. The offspring of party leaders, often called "princelings," are becoming more conspicuous, through both their expanding business interests and their evident appetite for luxury, at a time when public anger is rising over reports of official corruption and abuse of power.

A Family Affair

A look at China's leaders, past and present, and their offspring, often known as 'princelings.'

State-controlled media portray China's leaders as living by the austere Communist values they publicly espouse. But as scions of the political aristocracy carve out lucrative roles in business and embrace the trappings of wealth, their increasingly high profile is raising uncomfortable questions for a party that justifies its monopoly on power by pointing to its origins as a movement of workers and peasants.

Their visibility has particular resonance as the country approaches a once-a-decade leadership change next year, when several older princelings are expected to take the Communist Party's top positions. That prospect has led some in Chinese business and political circles to wonder whether the party will be dominated for the next decade by a group of elite families who already control large chunks of the world's second-biggest economy and wield considerable influence in the military.

"There's no ambiguity—the trend has become so clear," said Cheng Li, an expert on Chinese elite politics at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "Princelings were never popular, but now they've become so politically powerful, there's some serious concern about the legitimacy of the 'Red Nobility.' The Chinese public is particularly resentful about the princelings' control of both political power and economic wealth."

The current leadership includes some princelings, but they are counterbalanced by a rival nonhereditary group that includes President Hu Jintao, also the party chief, and Premier Wen Jiabao. Mr. Hu's successor, however, is expected to be Xi Jinping, the current vice president, who is the son of a revolutionary hero and would be the first princeling to take the country's top jobs. Many experts on Chinese politics believe that he has forged an informal alliance with several other princelings who are candidates for promotion.
Among them is the senior Mr. Bo, who is also the son of a revolutionary leader. He often speaks of his close ties to the Xi family, according to two people who regularly meet him. Mr. Xi's daughter is currently an undergraduate at Harvard, where Mr. Bo's son is a graduate student at the Kennedy School of Government.

“Princelings were never popular, but now ... there's some serious concern about the legitimacy of the 'Red Nobility.' ”

Already in the 25-member Politburo, Bo Xilai is a front-runner for promotion to its top decision-making body, the Standing Committee. He didn't respond to a request for comment through his office, and his son didn't respond to requests via email and friends.

The antics of some officials' children have become a hot topic on the Internet in China, especially among users of Twitter-like micro-blogs, which are harder for Web censors to monitor and block because they move so fast. In September, Internet users revealed that the 15-year-old son of a general was one of two young men who crashed a BMW into another car in Beijing and then beat up its occupants, warning onlookers not to call police.

An uproar ensued, and the general's son has now been sent to a police correctional facility for a year, state media report.

Top Chinese leaders aren't supposed to have either inherited wealth or business careers to supplement their modest salaries, thought to be around 140,000 yuan ($22,000) a year for a minister. Their relatives are allowed to conduct business as long as they don't profit from their political connections. In practice, the origins of the families' riches are often impossible to trace.

Last year, Chinese learned via the Internet that the son of a former vice president of the country—and the grandson of a former Red Army commander—had purchased a $32.4 million harbor-front mansion in Australia. He applied for a permit to tear down the century-old mansion and to build a new villa, featuring two swimming pools connected by a waterfall.

Many princelings engage in legitimate business, but there is a widespread perception in China that they have an unfair advantage in an economic system that, despite the country's embrace of capitalism, is still dominated by the state and allows no meaningful public scrutiny of decision making.
The state owns all urban land and strategic industries, as well as banks, which dole out loans overwhelmingly to state-run companies. The big spoils thus go to political insiders who can leverage personal connections and family prestige to secure resources, and then mobilize the same networks to protect them.

The People's Daily, the party mouthpiece, acknowledged the issue last year, with a poll showing that 91% of respondents believed all rich families in China had political backgrounds. A former Chinese auditor general, Li Jinhua, wrote in an online forum that the wealth of officials' family members "is what the public is most dissatisfied about."

One princeling disputes the notion that she and her peers benefit from their "red" backgrounds. "Being from a famous government family doesn't get me cheaper rent or special bank financing or any government contracts," Ye Mingzi, a 32-year-old fashion designer and granddaughter of a Red Army founder, said in an email. "In reality," she said, "the children of major government families get very high scrutiny. Most are very careful to avoid even the appearance of improper favoritism."

For the first few decades after Mao's 1949 revolution, the children of Communist chieftains were largely out of sight, growing up in walled compounds and attending elite schools such as the Beijing No. 4 Boys' High School, where the elder Mr. Bo and several other current leaders studied.

In the 1980s and '90s, many princelings went abroad for postgraduate studies, then often joined Chinese state companies, government bodies or foreign investment banks. But they mostly maintained a very low profile.

Now, families of China's leaders send their offspring overseas ever younger, often to top private schools in the U.S., Britain and Switzerland, to make sure they can later enter the best Western universities. Princelings in their 20s, 30s and 40s increasingly take prominent positions in commerce, especially in private equity, which allows them to maximize their profits and also brings them into regular contact with the Chinese and international business elite.

Younger princelings are often seen among the models, actors and sports stars who gather at a strip of nightclubs by the Workers' Stadium in Beijing to show off Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis. Others have been spotted talking business over cigars and vintage Chinese liquor in exclusive venues such as the Maotai Club, in a historic house near the Forbidden City.
On a recent afternoon at a new polo club on Beijing's outskirts, opened by a grandson of a former vice premier, Argentine players on imported ponies put on an exhibition match for prospective members. 
"We're bringing polo to the public. Well, not exactly the public," said one staff member. "That man over there is the son of an army general. That one's grandfather was mayor of Beijing."
Princelings also are becoming increasingly visible abroad. Ms. Ye, the fashion designer, was featured in a recent edition of Vogue magazine alongside Wan Baobao, a jewelry designer who is the granddaughter of a former vice premier.

But it is Bo Guagua who stands out among the younger princelings. No other child of a serving Politburo member has ever had such a high profile, both at home and abroad.

His family's status dates back to Bo Yibo, who helped lead Mao's forces to victory, only to be purged in the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution. Bo Yibo was eventually rehabilitated, and his son, Bo Xilai, was a rising star in the party by 1987, when Bo Guagua was born.

The boy grew up in a rarefied environment—closeted in guarded compounds, ferried around in chauffeur-driven cars, schooled partly by tutors and partly at the prestigious Jingshan school in Beijing, according to friends.

In 2000, his father, by then mayor of the northeastern city of Dalian, sent his 12-year-old son to a British prep school called Papplewick, which according to its website currently charges £22,425 (about $35,000) a year.

About a year later, the boy became the first person from mainland China to attend Harrow, one of Britain's most exclusive private schools, which according to its website currently charges £30,930 annually.

In 2006, by which time his father was China's commerce minister, Mr. Bo went to Oxford University to study philosophy, politics and economics. The current cost of that is about £26,000 a year. His current studies at Harvard's Kennedy School cost about $70,000 a year.

“'The children of major government families get very high scrutiny,' says the granddaughter of a Red Army founder.”

A question raised by this prestigious overseas education, worth a total of almost $600,000 at today's prices, is how it was paid for. Friends said that they didn't know, though one suggested that Mr. Bo's mother paid with the earnings of her legal career. Her law firm declined to comment.

Bo Guagua has been quoted in the Chinese media as saying that he won full scholarships from age 16 onward. Harrow, Oxford and the Kennedy School said that they couldn't comment on an individual student.
The cost of education is a particularly hot topic among members of China's middle class, many of whom are unhappy with the quality of schooling in China. But only the relatively rich can send their children abroad to study.

For others, it is Bo Guagua's freewheeling lifestyle that is controversial. Photos of him at Oxford social events—in one case bare-chested, other times in a tuxedo or fancy dress—have been widely circulated online.

In 2008, Mr. Bo helped to organize something called the Silk Road Ball, which included a performance by martial-arts monks from China's Shaolin temple, according to friends. He also invited Jackie Chan, the Chinese kung fu movie star, to lecture at Oxford, singing with him on stage at one point.

The following year, Mr. Bo was honored in London by a group called the British Chinese Youth Federation as one of "Ten Outstanding Young Chinese Persons." He was also an adviser to Oxford Emerging Markets, a firm set up by Oxford undergraduates to explore "investment and career prospects in emerging markets," according to its website.
This year, photos circulated online of Mr. Bo on a holiday in Tibet with another princeling, Chen Xiaodan, a young woman whose father heads the China Development Bank and whose grandfather was a renowned revolutionary. The result was a flurry of gossip, as well as criticism on the Internet of the two for evidently traveling with a police escort. Ms. Chen didn't respond to requests for comment via email and Facebook.

A Home Fit for a Princeling : A $32.4 million harborside mansion in Sydney.

Asked about his son's apparent romance at a news conference during this year's parliament meeting, Bo Xilai replied, enigmatically, "I think the business of the third generation—aren't we talking about democracy now?"

Friends say that the younger Mr. Bo recently considered, but finally decided against, leaving Harvard to work on an Internet start-up called The domain is registered to an address in Beijing. Staff members there declined to reveal anything about the business. "It's a secret," said a young man who answered the door.

It is unclear what Mr. Bo will do after graduating and whether he will be able to maintain such a high profile if his father is promoted, according to friends. He said during a speech at Peking University in 2009 that he wanted to "serve the people" in culture and education, according to a Chinese newspaper, Southern Weekend.

He ruled out a political career but showed some of his father's charisma and contradictions in answering students' questions, according to the newspaper. Asked about the pictures of him partying at Oxford, he quoted Chairman Mao as saying "you should have a serious side and a lively side," and went on to discuss what it meant to be one of China's new nobility.
"Things like driving a sports car, I know British aristocrats are not that arrogant," he said. "Real aristocrats absolutely don't do that, but are relatively low-key."

—Dinny McMahon contributed to this article.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

学会“海中游泳”还是仍旧“在尿盆里扑腾” Universal/Eternal Human Values vs. “Chinese Characteristics”

Evil is in our every day words and behaviors 邪恶就在我们每一天的言行之中
We let evil pass by without any response 是我们的怯懦与沉默使邪恶猖獗

Segments of Movie "Gentleman's Agreement"  电影“绅士们的默许”片段


陈凯一语 Kai Chen's Words

在专制文化中寻找幸福犹如在尿盆中撒满尿冒充大海去游泳、捕鱼、取乐,是一种极度害人害己的自欺欺人。 中国的专制就像这样一个充满尿液的尿盆,传统专制的毒素、病菌、病毒与寄生虫充斥着中国专制祖先的排泄物。 人们自欺地说着这液体也是咸的,只是有着“中国特色的黄色”,只是与外部大海的蓝色不同而已。 殊不知在这黄色的毒液病液废液之中是永远孕育产生不出健康的生命与有希望的未来。 在这黄色排泄液体中只能产生畸形的怪物、幻觉的高潮与污染毒害世界的虚无文化。

To seek happiness in a culture of despotism is like to create an ocean in a chamber pot with human urine, wishing to extract pleasure in swimming/living in it. It is an extreme form of self-deception.

China's despotic culture from ancient to modern is just like such a chamber pot full of human waste with all kinds of poisons, viruses, germs and parasites.... The self-deceiving Chinese boast that to swim in such a chamber pot is just like to swim in the real ocean, for the liquid tastes the same - all salty. The yellow color is only a distinctive "Chinese characteristic", only different from the ocean's blue. But what they haven't told you is that in such a "chamber pot lake", there can never be any healthy form of life, nor can there be any hope and future. The truth? In this filthy liquid of human waste there have already been countless deaths, pain, suffering and misery. There can only be perverted creatures, orgasmic illusions and endless nihilistic pollutant to poison the world.

Universal/Eternal Human Values vs. “Chinese Characteristics”

Establishing a “Free Culture” is more important than “Overthrowing Communist Regime”

“自由人” 对抗“中国人”序列
“Free Beings” vs. “Chinese” Series

By Kai Chen 陈凯 11/22/2011

许多“海外反共人士们”常常哀叹、诧异中共的“迟迟不倒”。 他们也常撰写文章分析其中的原因。 殊不知他们自身的“用中国的传统专制倒共”的逻辑使他们自己成为了“中共不倒”的主要原因。 他们自身的逻辑与道德的虚无与混乱正是问题的症结,而绝非解决问题的“对症下药”。

当人们高喊“民主”、“人权”的时候,他们从不意识到中共在反国民党取得政权之前喊得是同样的口号。 被长期欺骗的中国的人们自然地会做出一个无奈的但逻辑的结论 – “有什么用?”(言外之意:谁也不是什么好东西。) 迷恋于“追求完美的专制”而从不相信有普世终极的“人的价值”导致了中国的人们对一个“不可能完美但永远向前的‘自由社会’”无动于衷。 甚至有人常常撰文抨击美国的自由宪政文化,指责其“太自由了”。 “太自由社会就会大乱”,“有了枪那还得了”,“我们中国就是要有中国的特色”,“中国人就是要有人管”、、,如此论调比比皆是。

中共当局也乘机、乘乱、乘糊涂而入,不断用什么“新文化”洗脑运动告诉人们: 世界上没有什么“好与坏”、“真与假”、“对与错”、“进步与落后”,“正义与邪恶”,更没有什么普世终极的“人的价值”。 既然世界上一切都是“黑”的,都是以“强弱”、“内外”、“你我”、“上下”的利益而定的,那一个人的选择就是在“你的黑”与“我的黑”之间,在中国的“邪恶”与西方/美国的“邪恶”之间,在我们的“枪杆子/强权”与他们的“枪杆子/强权”之间。 当然了,在“龙的传人”的道德虚无的心态中,选择中国的与祖宗的“黑”与“邪恶”是理所当然的了。

我常说: 在西方/美国不是没有邪恶,但西方的基督文化告诉人们邪恶绝不是良德。 在一个自由社会中,人们认知自身的“原弊/不完美”也懂得“人是绝成不了神”的。 由此人们从不期待“有原弊的人”会建立一个“完美”的社会与制度。 人们只基于普世终极的价值去着力建立与维护人的“生命、自由、尊严”与“对个体幸福追求的权利”。 基于对普世终极的价值的存在的信仰,西方/美国的人们不断地用“基督精神”的指南走入未知、创造求新、走向未来与希望。 这是一个“方向性的(向前行的)文化心态”。

在中国,人们的文化心态则是与西方/美国相反。 在几千年的“驴拉磨”、“抽陀螺”的“专制朝代文化”的心态中,人们用“道德虚无/道德相对”的心态建立与维护了一个“好就是坏”、“真就是假”、“黑就是白”的“强权/杀人决定一切”的“人鬼文化”。 “繁荣富强”、“为国为民族”、“和谐小康”等“用群压个”“用权压值”“用多压少”“用枪/强欺弱”成了“中国人”的“普世终极”的“具有中国特色”的反价值的病态迷恋。 在中国,邪恶被认为是良德,精明的欺骗被认为是智慧, “偷抢骗”被认为是“赚钱”,“愤青报国”被认为是勇敢,抄袭、剽窃、模仿被认为是创造,“送红包、拍马屁、受贿行贿”被认为是有“中国特色”的“关系学”,“强奸、诱奸、卖淫”被认为是“爱情”的同义语,没有尊严的“混日子”被认为是“生活”。

对照一下这两种文化心态,你还能说希望与绝望、存在与虚无是一回事儿吗? 你还能说在尿盆里扑腾的“黄色文化”与在自然界的大海中畅游的“蓝色文化”是一回事儿吗? 你也可能会说: “有什么不一样? 都是液体,都是咸的,尿盆里的尿撒多了(GDP)人就可以浮起来。 只不过我们是中国特色 – 黄的。” 你也可能会说: “有什么不一样? 在西方/美国也一样:有时左、有时右、有时快、有时慢。 驴拉磨/抽陀螺与‘向前行’的感觉不都是一样的吗?” 最终你也可以说: “反正人总得死。 死与生没有什么本质区别。 下辈子又是一个人。” 无怪乎“中国人”活着的时候好像他们永远都死不了,死的时候又好像他们一分钟都没有活过。

中共党朝不倒,事情只能越来越坏。 中共党朝倒了,事情也不一定就会变好。 伊朗与埃及就是例子。 共产党曾高叫: “只要打到了蒋家王朝,中国就会有希望/民主”。 真的吗?!

中国的共产王朝就如同中国的历代王朝一样,都逃不过衰败、腐朽、灭亡的朝代规律与命运。 它的末日就在眼前。 一个被蛀虫蛀空的,腐烂的树是没有生机的,必然倒塌的死木头。 像中国专制的许多王朝一样,中共党朝的倒台很有可能并不是由于外部力量的推挤,而是在于内部的腐败与分赃不均而引起的。 这就说明共后社会的心态与价值的准备(“用什么来取代中共党朝?”这一命题)比“倒共”本身重要一百倍。

“中共必倒”这一事实绝不等于说“共后的社会”就自然是一个自由的道德社会。 人们今天更需要将注意力放到“共后社会”的建立上: 但至今我还没有看到一点迹象表明人们在对未来有设想、准备与行动。 我曾在“共后时代的标像符号及语言/一些构想”一文中表达了我的观点。 我也希望更多的人们将注意力集中到“共后自由社会”的建立上。 什么样的文化心态、政治构架、宗教信仰、宪法法律、语言艺术、标像符号等等是人们要从头开始建立的? 什么样的文化心态、政治构架、宗教信仰、宪法法律、语言艺术、标像符号等等是要被彻底摈弃的? 人们是否还想用“追求完美专制”的心态去“自上而下”地“走捷径”而再误入“驴拉磨”“抽陀螺”的“专制朝代的无奈循环”的歧途? “中国人”对邪恶的无限容忍与对良知真理漠视的能力总是能让我膛目结舌。

共产王朝比国民党邪恶一百倍。 谁又能保证“返祖复古”的“共后王朝”不比共产王朝再邪恶一百倍呢? 为什么人们总是在“坏与更坏”之间无奈徘徊而拒绝建立“方向性”的,基普世终极价值而在“好与更好”之间做出个体的选择并承担后果与责任呢? “婊子牌坊”的中间道路是没有的。 你必须选择。

艾未未“Fuck”天安门 Ai Weiwei Fucks Tiananmen


Symbolism after Communism/Some Thoughts

Truth, Justice, Liberty, Dignity

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

中共政权的末日即将来到。 一个重大的、急切的任务是在后共时代建立新的崇尚真理,正义,自由与尊严的文化和政体。 反映这些新的价值的标像符号及语言词汇是绝对必要的与迫切的。 这需要人的正向的清晰的道德标准和人的广博的想象力。 反映负向价值的标像符号及语言词汇一定要尽快消亡。 反映正向价值的标像符号及语言词汇一定要尽快建立。

The beginning of the downfall of the China's communist regime has already arrived. An urgent task of an utmost importance in the post-communist era will face us very soon. We must establish an entirely new form of government based on an entirely new culture that values Truth, Justice, Liberty and Human Dignity. To do so means first to establish a set of new symbols and a set of new vocabulary, possibly based on a new language. It is not easy but it must be done.

To establish this new culture and a new form of government, one must have moral clarity and abundant imaginations. Nonetheless, old symbolism, vocabulary and language that reflect the values of despotism and tyranny must be replaced by a new set of symbols and vocabulary, by a new language that reflects human yearning for freedom and happiness. And this must be done as soon as possible.


By Kai Chen 陈凯 (Reprint 7/20/2011)

We can all sense the coming demise of the Chinese communist regime. And they, the communists themselves, know as well that their reign of tyranny is coming to an end soon. We must now ask ourselves that whether or not we are ready for a new society, a new set of human values, an entirely new kind of culture and an entirely new form of government. We must ask ourselves whether or not our own mind is still controlled by the old symbols, old vocabulary, old language, old habits and old patterns of behavior. [b]If we are not aware of the fact that the poisons in us by our slave masters from the past still effect the way we think and behave, we are doomed to repeat the history.

I now want to establish a survey here to arouse your own imagination, to challenge your own old habits, to question your own mindset and to cleanse your own cultural poisons by generations and dynasties of despotism. By doing so, you may start a new culture yourself here. You may live in a new state of consciousness. You may finally embark on your own journey, away from the vicious Chinese dynastic cycles, toward human dignity, human freedom and human happiness.

Best. Kai Chen 陈凯


下面就是新标像符号与语言词汇的普查 (请贴回复):

The following is a survey, as well as my own view, on what you would like to establish in terms of symbolism and language in the post-communist era: (You can post your response)


1. 国号:
The New Nation's Title:

My Own View: United Federation of East Asia (UFEA)


2. 国歌:
The New Nation's National Anthem:

My Own View: It must be newly composed. It must reflect the meaning and values of the new nation -- freedom, human yearning for dignity and happiness.


3. 国旗:
The New National Flag:

My Own View: It must reflect the values of Freedom (color blue must be added). It must reject despotic unity and social hierarchy (no big and small stars). It must reject racism (no color yellow)

象征自由的蓝色一定要有。 反映等级与专制大一统的标志(大小)一定要拒绝。 反映种族主义与狭隘族群心态的标志(黄色)一定要拒绝。

4. 政府建筑:
Governmental Structures:

My Own View: New governmental structures must be built to reflect the principles of "Separation of Powers" and "Checks and Balances" within the government. Absolutely no past palaces and old structures can be used for new government.

新的政府一定不能在旧宫殿与旧政府建筑中执政。 新政府建筑一定要体现新的分权,相互制约与服务于人的基本原则。

5. 天安门广场:
Tiananmen Square in Beijing:

My Own View: Old communist symbols on the square must be entirely eliminated. Tiananmen Gate can only be part of the old museum and can not be used for political purposes. Tiananmen Square must be a giant garden and lawn for people to enjoy life.

天安门广场上的共产时期的标像符号一定要被销毁。 天安门城楼将被立法成为非政治文物,成为只是故宫博物院的一部分。 天安门广场将被改为一个大花园与草坪供人们休闲消遣。

6. 法律与教育语言:
Language to Establish the Constitution and laws. Language for a Foundation of New Educational System:

My Own View: Constitutions and laws must be written first in English and any confusion in the vocabulary must be clarified by English first. English must be the base language in reestablishing the educational system. Chinese language must be secondary and gradually fade away to become only an art form.

以英文为底书写宪法与法律,以英文为底建立新的教育系统。 中文将逐渐从社会中淡化,至终只淡化为一种艺术。

7. 新标像符号取代旧标像符号:
New Symbolism Replacing Old Symbolism:

My Own View: The Chinese Statue of Liberty in 1989 should be the new symbol on Tiananmen Square and nation-wide in general. New symbols reflecting Truth, Justice, Liberty and Human Dignity, such as statues, arts, buildings, etc. must be erected nation-wide.

1989 的天安门自由女神像一定要成为在东亚大陆上人们新价值的标志。 反映真理,正义,自由与人的尊严的雕像,艺术与建筑一定要在东亚大陆各地大量广泛地建立。

8. 各独立联邦体自立称号,自立标像符号:
Each Political Entities Establish Their Own Symbolism:

My View: Each political entity under the constitution within the Federation must be independent to establish their own set of symbols such as anthems, songs, flowers, animal, flags, etc..


9. 禁毛像与共产标像符号:
Ban Mao's Image and Communist Symbols:

The new nation's legislature should legislate to ban public display of Mao's image and symbols of communism such as sickle and hammer/communist regime's flag.

My View: The new nation's citizens will be fined or sentenced to public services for displaying Mao's image and communist symbols.


Saturday, November 19, 2011

美国情报局/中共已成为对美最大的威胁 China deemed biggest threat to U.S.

James Clapper on China Threat 美国情报局-中共成为美国最大的威胁


China deemed biggest threat to U.S.

Russia second, DNI chief says

By Eli Lake The Washington Times

Thursday, March 10, 2011

China’s nuclear arsenal poses the most serious “mortal threat” to the United States among nation states, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate on Thursday.

Director of US National Intelligence James Clapper

In candid testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mr. Clapper said he considered China the most significant threat among nation states, with Russia posing the second-greatest threat. He later clarified the comments by saying he did not assess that China or Russia had the intention to launch an attack on the United States.

The testimony contrasts with statements by Obama administration officials who have sought to highlight the dangers of Iran and North Korea while paying less attention to China and Russia.

Mr. Clapper said he does not assess that North Korea and Iran pose greater strategic threats because they lack the forces that Russia and China have that could deliver a nuclear attack on the United States.

North Korea has tested at least twice a multistaged long-range missile capable of hitting the United States. On Tuesday, Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, told a conference in Washington that analysts estimate that Iran would be able to deliver a payload by missile to the U.S. East Coast by 2015.

Asked by Sen. Joe Manchin III, West Virginia Democrat, what country he viewed as the greatest adversary of the United States, Mr. Clapper said: “Probably China, if the question is pick one nation state.”

He added, “We have a treaty, the New START treaty, with the Russians. I guess I would rank them a little lower because we don’t have such a treaty with the Chinese.”

China, according to successive Pentagon reports to Congress, is building up its strategic nuclear forces and has spurned offers from the administration to begin talks on nuclear arms, missile defenses, space and cyberweapons, as well as an international agreement to limit the production of fissile material.

On Libya, Mr. Clapper said besieged leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi likely will prevail in his regime’s battle against rebel forces. He also said the North African state may break into three republics or, in a worst-case scenario, descend into a lawless state like Somalia.

That view appears at odds with the position of the White House. President Obama has said Col. Gadhafi should resign from power. This week, senior U.S. officials also suggested that a U.N. Security Council resolution on Libya would not prohibit the transfer of arms to the rebels.

Mr. Clapper’s Libya remarks along with his assessment of the China threat earned him rebukes from some senators. In an interview with Fox News, Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, said Mr. Clapper should step down or be fired for saying in a public forum that Col. Gadhafi would prevail over the rebels.

During the hearing, Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat and committee chairman, said he was “surprised” by Mr. Clapper’s statement on China.

After Mr. Clapper clarified that he was speaking about capabilities and not intentions, Mr. Levin said, “I was just as surprised by that answer as your first answer. You’re saying that China now has the intent to be a mortal adversary of the United States?”

Mr. Clapper responded, “Well the question is who, from my vantage, from among the nation states who would pose potentially the greatest [threat] if I had to pick one country, which I am loathe to do because I am more of the mind to consider their capabilities, both Russia and China potentially represent a broad threat to the United States. I don’t think either country today has the intent to mortally attack us.”

Defense officials have acknowledged that U.S. intelligence agencies have underestimated China's military capabilities. But the intelligence community is beginning to express more concerns about China's military buildup, which has been carried out largely in secret.

Army Lt. Gen. Ronald L. Burgess Jr., the Defense Intelligence Agency director, appeared with Mr. Clapper and agreed that China’s power projection is growing.

“While remaining focused on Taiwan as a primary mission, China will, by 2020, lay the foundation for a force able to accomplish broader and regional global objectives,” he said.

Gen. Burgess said China's military “continues to face deficiencies in interservice cooperation and actual experience in joint exercises and combat operations.”

“China’s leaders continue to stress asymmetric strategies to leverage China’s advantage while exploiting potential opponents’ perceived vulnerabilities,” the general said.

One asymmetric strategy China is pursuing is the use of computer-based cyberprobes into U.S. classified computer networks. Mr. Clapper said the cyber-activity is a “formidable concern.”

“The Chinese have made a substantial investment in this area, they have a very large organization devoted to it and they’re pretty aggressive,” Mr. Clapper said. “This is just another way in which they glean information about us and collect on us for technology purposes, so it’s a very formidable concern.”

In the hearing, Mr. Clapper stressed that Iran’s supreme leader had not given the order to produce nuclear weapons in Iran.

The comments on Iran’s nuclear program appeared to support a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate that said Iran halted work on nuclear weapons in 2003.

Last month, a CIA report to Congress dropped language from two previous reports that said Iran was keeping open its option to build nuclear weapons, as the National Intelligence Council recently notified Congress that it had altered the 2007 estimate. Officials declined to specify what was changed because the revision was classified.

Gen. Burgess said Iran is helping terrorists train and obtain weapons.

“At Iran’s behest, Lebanese Hezbollah provides Iraqi insurgents with weapons and training to attack U.S. forces. Iran also provides weapons, explosives and munitions to insurgents in Afghanistan.”

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

China- Russia -Iran allience 中俄伊新轴心

Friday, November 18, 2011

从活熊取胆汁到活人取器官-吃人奴役文化的必然 From Bear Farm to Organ Harvesting

China's cruel bear farms 中国的活熊取胆汁


From Bear Farm to Organ Harvesting

陈凯一语: Kai Chen's Words:

从活熊取胆汁,到活兽剥皮,到猴头大宴,到笼鸟取乐、、、 吃人奴役的文化一直被中国人不以为耻,反以为荣地认为那是中国文化不同于西方文化的特殊性。 他们不知道这种认识正是他们一直受辱做奴的根源,正是他们永远脱离不了“人吃人”的文化的基点原因。 吃人,受辱,忠国,做奴的伪道德早已成为中国人们自我认同的主要成分。

From bear farms to skinning wild animals alive, from monkey brain banquet to caged birds as entertainment..., man-eating slave culture has long become a source of not a shame, but a pride for the Chinese. They often brag that this is the Chinese cultural difference from that of the West. They have yet to realize that it is indeed this fake pride that dooms the Chinese into the abyss of despotism and slavery, that indeed it is this fake pride that dooms the Chinese into an eternal "man-eating" dynastic cycle. A zombie-like, blood-sucking slave loyal only to the institution of state-slavery has long been the essential identity for most Chinese.


Dear Visitors:

Have you thought about the roots of the Chinese despotism and why it has lasted so long?

For those who refuse to admit the Chinese culture is essentially evil, I want to ask you this question: "Why does a good culture, as you claim Chinese culture is, always eliminate good people and retain bad people via a vicious cultural selection process??" If the Chinese culture is as good as you claim, why are you unable to return to your homeland? Why do those who remain on the mainland of China lack essential moral fibers a normal human being should have? Why do the Chinese dynasties, including the current communist dynasty, decline one after another, year after year? Why does the Chinese society keep deteriorating to today's state composed of only zombies? Why are the Chinese unable to escape from the traps set up by their own ancestors?

Unless you honestly answer those questions, you will not truly understand yourself, and you will not understand the necessary connection between the first Qin Emperor and Mao, between the old-man dominated Chinese family and despotic tyranny in China, between monkey brain banquet and man-eating-man in society, between bear bile farming and human organ harvesting.... Only truth shall set you free
. Unless you search honestly for the truth, you will never lift yourself above an evil culture of slavery. Unless you honestly face your own demon in your own heart and mind, you will never progress out of the seemingly interminable Chinese dynasties.  

My best wishes to you all. Kai Chen 陈凯

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

使自己成为伟大的人 Be A Great Man Yourself, the World Will be Great

伟大的自强人   A Free Being's Greatness


Be A Great Man Yourself, the World Will be Great

"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series

陈凯一语:Kai Chen's Words:

"Only the good and the real can be great. It takes a great man to recognize greatness; it takes a small man to deny greatness. To recognize greatness around you is to allow yourself to be great; to deny greatness around you is to deny and destroy your own greatness. True greatness, like goodness, will manifest itself no matter what. Be brave and prepared to be great yourself, if you don't see any greatness around you."

只有真实的和道德的才可能是伟大的。 只有人的伟大才能去承认伟大本身;一个小人往往去否认伟大。 承认你存在周围的伟大其实是允许你自身伟大的可能;否认你存在周围的伟大其实是否认与毁灭你自身伟大的可能 。 真正的伟大就像真正的天良一样,不论如何都会闪亮发光。 如果你的周围充满了渺小,拿出勇气,做好准备去表现你自身的伟大。

价值一语: Words of Value:

Being strong does not mean being strong in a physical sense. It means in a spiritual, mental sense and in terms of a person's character. One who is indomitable in facing life's obstacles is our hero, for he or she is the truly strong. --- Kai Chen

强者并不意味着生理上的强壮。 强者意味着人在精神,头脑,与品质上的强。 一个绝不被生活中的挫折所压倒的不屈不挠的人是真正的强者和英雄。 --- 陈凯

Good nature is worth more than knowledge, more than money, more than honor, to the persons who possess it. --- Henry Ward Beecher

优秀的品质对一个人比知识,金钱,荣誉更重要。 --- Henry Ward Beecher 


By Kai Chen 陈凯 (Reprint 11/16/2011)

China has never been a great country. Mao has never been a great man. They have never been such because they have never been real and never been good.

I have never believed that small, evil and despicable men can create a great country. I have always beieved that only great individuals can create a great country. If you ever expect China to be great, be great yourself. If you ever expect China to be free, be free yourself. If you ever expect China to have a hope, be hopeful yourself... You are the one who creates your own tomorrow. You are the one who creates your own fate and destiny. Don't be afraid to be great, and don't be afraid of the responsibilities that come with your greatness. Shed your "small man" mentality, manifest your greatness. It is in you, it is in everyone of us. It is always there. Only you are too timid to admit it, or too reluctant to recognize it. But without you showing your greatness, how can the world be great?!


Do You Truly Want Freedom?

A Free Being's Virtues and Responsibilities

"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series

By Kai Chen 陈凯 (Written 5/1/2011, Reprint 9/2/2011)

"The price of freedom is huge; but freedom itself is priceless."

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要有自由人必有的勇气。 你就一定要战胜你心中的恐惧感去面对真实。 “只有追求真实才能使你得到自由。”

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要在灵魂中建立真实的信仰 – 相信世界上有真实、有爱、有尊严,相信正义一定会战胜邪恶,真实一定会暴露虚假,自由一定会击垮奴役,爱一定会超越仇恨。

你真想自由吗? 你的上苍就就一定是解放人的,有宽容与爱的,勇敢探索挑战未知的,引导人走向幸福、欢乐、创造与希望的;你的上苍就绝不会是恐吓人的、威胁人的、惩罚人的、扭曲人的与奴役人的。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要认知自身的原弊而决不能将自己视为神,或视为他人的依附与主宰。 你的自知与不断的自我发掘是你永远追求自由的先决。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定不要灭绝与贬低你自身的伟大、价值与美德,也绝不要允许任何人灭绝与贬低你自身来自上苍的独特的品质与特质。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定不要停止对未知的探求,对未来的憧憬,对自身的认知。 你就一定不能在知识上设置任何禁区。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定不要说谎,特别是不要对自己说谎。 你就一定不要造假并为自己的方便与走捷径而制造幻觉。 你就一定要永远追求真实,不管真实使你痛苦或快乐,不管真实把你带向何处。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定不要相信“和谐”、“繁荣”、“统一”、“民族”、“大家”、“族群”、“国家”等虚无的伪价值并为此保持沉默,空喊口号,为群害人,为强权与争权而行为说话。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要用对自身的发掘与努力去创造价值与他人交流/交换,而决不能用精明去讨好多数,献媚强权,取益他人而不择手段地去偷、抢、骗取价值。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定不能期待个体财产与成就的平等;你就一定不能指望一个绝对平安/安定的生活;你就绝对不能幻想有什么“世界和平”,“世界大同”,“人间天堂”。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要建立真实的个体认同而绝不允许他人与群体/家庭将你的个体价值放置在它们的框框盒子里。 那些想要用虚假的“确定感”消灭/否认真实的独特的个体认同的人既不会有“确定感”也不会得到自由与真实的幸福。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要勇于承担风险与犯错的代价: 人生最大的危险是不去承担风险;人生最大的错误是因为害怕犯错误而无所作为。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要“是人”而绝不要去“做人”。 “是人”(Human Being)是因为你是上苍所创而具有你自身特殊的意义与实质。 “做人/奴”(Human/Slave Molding)则是要你遵循人造的伦理/礼去消灭/否认你的上苍赋予的特质与实质。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要有自尊(self-esteem)并给予你的家人与他人“是人”(Human Being)的尊严。 你自身的自由与尊严是你尊重家人与他人的自由与尊严的必要前提。

你真想自由吗? 你就一定要选择使用你自由的工具与武器。 竹篮子是打不起水来的。 客观的语言与词汇是认知真实一个必须。 英文是最好的工具选择。 中文只能作为你的艺术爱好。

无手母亲 Hangless Mother

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

中共党朝是冷战的赢家 Winner of the Cold War: Communist China

Insane Chinese nationalism throughout the world 2008 狂热的“中国人”


Winner of the Cold War: Communist China

Jeffrey T. Kuhner


向北京缴械 - 奥巴马当局如何导致美国的衰落与中共党朝的猖獗 

By Brett M. Decker and William C. Triplett II
Regnery, $27.95, 231 pages

Book Link: 书籍连锁:

President Obama is creating a post-American world — one that is ushering in the dominance of China. Mr. Obama is fostering U.S. economic and military decline while simultaneously empowering Beijing’s rise to superpower status. China’s communists are on the march. Unless Americans wake up to the growing threat, both internal and external, our victory in the Cold War will have been useless.

This is the disturbing theme of “Bowing to Beijing: How Barack Obama Is Hastening America’s Decline and Ushering a Century of Chinese Domination,” by Brett M. Decker, editorial page editor of The Washington Times, and William C. Triplett II, a best-selling author and renowned China analyst. Lucid, concise and comprehensively researched, the book is a fire bell in the night. It is a dire warning that China has become what America once was to Great Britain: the ambitious upstart determined to eclipse the global colossus. The result will be not only the end of the American moment, but the triumph of a belligerent authoritarian communism hostile to democracy and the West.

“China’s leaders are engaged in a war against America. They view us as a threat to their regime and way of life. Hence, they have embarked on a systematic, long-term program to surpass us militarily, economically and politically,” Mr. Decker said in an interview. “They are willing to do anything — purchase our national debt, steal our intellectual property, spend obscene amounts to buy influence in Washington, engage in extensive espionage in our government and large corporations, and sell sensitive missile and nuclear technology to our mortal enemies — to defeat us. And the Obama administration is turning a blind eye.”

The authors reveal that Beijing believes it is in a life-and-death struggle against America. For years, China’s ruthless communist regime has been committing hostile, aggressive acts — stealing valuable military technology, blatantly violating patent and intellectual property laws, manipulating its currency to artificially boost exports to the United States, lying about the nature and extent of its massive military buildup, sending spies into the highest echelons of our government and private sector, hacking into our computer networks, waging cyberwarfare, purchasing stakes in major banks, and cultivating our economic dependence on Chinese business.

In response, Mr. Obama has embraced the Chinese dragon. In January 2011, he acceded to Chinese demands and gave a state dinner honoring President Hu Jintao. Mr. Obama praised Mr. Hu as a statesman and welcomed China’s prominent role in world affairs. It was a craven surrender. The authors point out that while he was communist party chief in Tibet, Mr. Hu oversaw the slaughter of hundreds of Tibetan Buddhist monks. Moreover, he has ruled China with an iron fist. Thousands of dissidents have been murdered or rot in jail.

The media is heavily censored. Free speech is nonexistent. Basic human rights are abrogated routinely.

The country’s Christians, Falun Gong and Muslims face state-sanctioned persecution. Tens of millions are in gulags, being used as slave labor to drive China’s booming economy. Mr. Hu staunchly supports Beijing’s genocidal one-child policy, which has led to millions of forced abortions and has coerced countless women to be sterilized against their will. He is not a progressive visionary; rather, he is a butcher. This is the man Mr. Obama toasts — and to whom he bows.

At a major nuclear summit in 2010, Mr. Obama bent over and bowed fully to Mr. Hu. The Chinese leader did not reciprocate. In fact, his face and body language conveyed the opposite: contempt. The protocol breech is nuts, and frequent. As president, Mr. Obama is constantly abnegating himself to foreign leaders. The emperor of Japan, the king of Saudi Arabia, the queen of England — there is almost no one to whom he will not bow. Domestically, he has bowed to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and even to the Democratic mayor of Tampa. It is odd. The authors say Mr. Obama even has bowed repeatedly to midlevel Chinese functionaries.

His submissive behavior does more than demean and degrade the presidency. For the authors, it rightly signifies Washington’s growing subservience to Beijing. Under Mr. Obama, America’s national debt has soared to nearly $15 trillion. Obamacare, the massive stimulus, crippling regulations and the reckless borrowing and public spending have brought us to the brink of bankruptcy. The private sector has been shackled. Economic sclerosis has set in. Our military lacks the dynamic economy necessary to sustain our global standing. Mr. Obama has significantly weakened American power.

China is filling the vacuum. Beijing now owns more than $1.3 trillion of U.S. debt. It annually runs huge trade surpluses, flooding our market with everything from toys to computers to manufacturing products. America’s industrial base is being wiped out. As we become the world’s greatest debtor nation, China is amassing more than $3 trillion in hard-currency reserves. Its economy is exploding, fueling annual growth rates averaging 10 percent for nearly two decades.

The authors show, however, that the red dragon’s rise is anything but peaceful. Beijing is embarking on a huge, almost unprecedented military buildup. It possesses the largest armed force on the planet. It has 2.3 million men in uniform, compared to 1.4 million in the United States. If one includes reservists and paramilitary forces, the total number is close to 5 million. China is expanding its nuclear arsenal. It is constructing a world-class navy to dominate the western Pacific. It menaces its democratic neighbors, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. Along with its client state of North Korea, China has sold missiles and vital nuclear technology to Iran, Syria and Venezuela – aiding and abetting our archadversaries. It is spearheading a global anti-American axis.

When confronted with the overwhelming evidence of Chinese expansionism and nefarious duplicity, the Obama administration has refused to take action. The reason is simple: America is turning into an economic vassal of China. We can no longer afford to upset — never mind challenge — our new imperial master. Instead, we must bow. This is Mr. Obama’s real, enduring and shameful legacy. We didn’t win the Cold War. Communist China did.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a radio talk show personality and a columnist at The Washington Times and

Brainwashing the Chinese youths, much like Hitler's youths in Nazi Germany.  被洗脑的中国儿童们的狂热