Monday, February 28, 2011
Milton Friedman on his Ideal Society 佛里德曼自由谈-理想社会
Kai Chen's Words:
When people use votes of majority to rob others' property and rights, in order to benefit themselves, "Democracy" will deteriorate into an evil game in which those who don't produce values demand power to control those who do. "Constitutional Republic", NOT "Democracy", is what we need to strive to establish, in order to secure individual liberty and a just society.
Democracy vs. Liberty
民主 vs. 自由
Posted by Walter Williams on Feb 28th, 2011 and filed under Afternoon Edition, Daily Mailer, FrontPage.
It is truly disgusting for me to hear politicians, national and international talking heads and pseudo-academics praising the Middle East stirrings as democracy movements. We also hear democracy as the description of our own political system. Like the founders of our nation, I find democracy and majority rule a contemptible form of government.
You say, “Whoa, Williams, you really have to explain yourself this time!”
I’ll begin by quoting our founders on democracy. James Madison, in Federalist Paper No. 10, said that in a pure democracy, “there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual.” At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Virginia Gov. Edmund Randolph said, “… that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.” John Adams said, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” Alexander Hamilton said, “We are now forming a Republican form of government. Real Liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much to democracy, we shall soon shoot into a monarchy, or some other form of dictatorship.”
The word “democracy” appears nowhere in the two most fundamental documents of our nation — the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Our Constitution’s Article IV, Section 4, guarantees “to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” If you don’t want to bother reading our founding documents, just ask yourself: Does our pledge of allegiance to the flag say to “the democracy for which it stands,” or to “the Republic for which it stands”? Or, did Julia Ward Howe make a mistake in titling her Civil War song “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”? Should she have titled it “The Battle Hymn of the Democracy”?
What’s the difference between republican and democratic forms of government? John Adams captured the essence when he said, “You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.” That means Congress does not grant us rights; their job is to protect our natural or God-given rights.
For example, the Constitution’s First Amendment doesn’t say Congress shall grant us freedom of speech, the press and religion. It says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”
Contrast the framers’ vision of a republic with that of a democracy. Webster defines a democracy as “government by the people; especially: rule of the majority.” In a democracy, the majority rules either directly or through its elected representatives. As in a monarchy, the law is whatever the government determines it to be. Laws do not represent reason. They represent force. The restraint is upon the individual instead of government. Unlike that envisioned under a republican form of government, rights are seen as privileges and permissions that are granted by government and can be rescinded by government.
To highlight the offensiveness to liberty that democracy and majority rule is, just ask yourself how many decisions in your life would you like to be made democratically. How about what car you drive, where you live, whom you marry, whether you have turkey or ham for Thanksgiving dinner? If those decisions were made through a democratic process, the average person would see it as tyranny and not personal liberty. Is it no less tyranny for the democratic process to determine whether you purchase health insurance or set aside money for retirement? Both for ourselves, and our fellow man around the globe, we should be advocating liberty, not the democracy that we’ve become where a roguish Congress does anything upon which they can muster a majority vote.
Obama is using tax-payers’ dollars to build mosques overseas 奥巴马用赋税人的钱在海外建伊斯兰庙
Kai Chen's Words:
Anti-America, anti-capitalism, anti-Semitism, anti-individualism, anti-Christianity, anti-freedom are some of the features commonly shared by the communists/socialists and radical Islamists. The left in the West/America, headed by no other than Obama himself, through their appeasement policies toward world communism (such as Confucian Socialism in China) and radical Islamists (such as Islamic Socialism in the Mideast), poses as the biggest threat to America, to the world peace and freedom.
The Left’s Converging Political Misjudgments: Communism and Radical Islam
共产与穆斯林份子的同谋 - 反美反资反自由
Posted by Paul Hollander on Feb 28th, 2011 and filed under Daily Mailer, FrontPage.
The fall of Mubarak in a country where the Muslim Brotherhood is the strongest and best organized political movement raises the possibility of an eventual outcome similar to that in Iran that followed the overthrow of the Shah in 1979. At the same time, we should remind ourselves that history need not repeat itself: Egypt is not Iran and the Egyptian military may prevent the rise to power of the Brotherhood. But in the event that it comes to power, there is little reason to imagine that it would usher in a system more open, enlightened and liberal than that of Mubarak. Far more likely, it would resemble the repressive theocracy of Iran. While the actual historical and political developments in these two countries may diverge, the similarities between perceptions on the Left of these two historical events, and the part played by political Islam, are already quite pronounced.
Why do people on the Left, and especially intellectuals — often motivated by high ideals and good intentions — so often make poor political judgments, especially about the adversaries of the United States? It is of course always difficult to generalize about entities such as intellectuals. There are no opinion surveys addressed to “intellectuals” as such, hence, we only learn about the attitudes and beliefs of the more prominent among them who have the opportunity and inclination to express themselves in writing or in the mass media.
To be sure, there are surveys of the political attitudes of various professions, including professors, which include a high proportion of intellectuals in the humanities and social sciences. These surveys make clear that most American academics are left of center: “Democrats typically outnumber Republicans at elite universities by at least six to one among the general faculty and by higher ratios in the humanities and social sciences.” A recent study of academic social psychologists found a total lack of diversity in their political views and found them to constitute a “tribal-moral community united by sacred values.” Of course, these attitudes are just as prevalent in departments of English, sociology, anthropology, history and political science as among social psychologists.
The global rise of Islamic radicalism, loosely paralleled by the global decline of communism, provides a new occasion to ponder the political judgments of those on the Left, including many intellectuals. Their observations about Islamic radicalism suggest parallels between their disposition towards the two important political-ideological currents of our times: communism and political Islam. This is not to say that these two sets of attitudes have been the same, but there are some notable similarities as well as differences spelled out below.
By the time of the fall of the Soviet Union, not many American leftist intellectuals were enamored of the Soviet system (or those modeled after it), with the exception of Cuba and, for a shorter period, Nicaragua. Venezuela under Chavez has become a new destination for a smaller group of supporters. One of them, Eva Golinger, became a resident supporter and cheerleader for Chavez, describing herself as “a soldier of this revolution… I would do whatever asked of me for this country.” As the New York Times put it, “Her zeal invokes earlier waves of political pilgrims in Latin America from rich countries like the volunteers who cut Cuban sugar cane in the 1960s or the Sandalistas… who flocked to Nicaragua in the 1980s.” Ms. Golinger has expressed warmth and sympathy toward Ahmadinejad of Iran and Lukashenko of Belarus. She considered the latter a socialist country, not a dictatorship, “where people seemed really into their communal work and stuff like that.”
But even if many members of the Left no longer admired these systems, the attitudes which gave rise to their sympathy and support in the first place were by no means gone. These attitudes were deeply rooted in a highly critical disposition toward American society, disdain for capitalism and commerce, ignorance about “actually existing” communist states, as well as a propensity to chronic moral indignation.
While militant Islamic movements and theocratic Iran shared the anti-American disposition of communist states, their anti-Americanism has been far more intense and irrational than the communist variety due to its religious inspiration. A strong aversion to modernity has further added to hostility to the United States, correctly seen as a major embodiment of modernity. In turn, Islamic movements came to be viewed with a degree of sympathy by numerous American intellectuals and those on the Left, who were convinced of the worthlessness of their own society, and were irresistibly drawn to “the enemies of their enemy.”
It has not been easy, sometimes impossible, to project upon these movements the attributes which earlier attracted many American and other Western intellectuals to communist systems. Unlike the movements and political systems inspired by Marxism, Islamic movements and beliefs are not universalistic, they are openly and demonstratively intolerant and uphold traditional religious beliefs that are alien to secular, leftist Western intellectuals. Islamic societies permeated by Islamic tradition oppress women, hate and mistreat homosexuals, and are beholden to a wide range of rigid religious beliefs and practices, including corporal punishments such as stoning, amputation and beheading. Such attitudes and policies are difficult to accept for progressive leftists who believe in the equality of women and in the rights of people of different sexual orientation and are opposed to capital and corporal punishment. These attributes of Islamic movements and societies have given a pause to some on the Left, but many others have managed to ignore these blemishes, or ascribe them to an authentic cultural heritage that is to be treated with toleration.
In addition to their intense hostility to the United States (greatly appreciated by the native social critics) Islamic movements and the one existing theocratic Islamic state (Iran) also partake of the allure of the Third World. Upon the latter, many Western intellectuals have, for some time, projected their longings and hopes following their partial disillusionment with communist states. The imaginary virtues of the Third World included, above all, a presumed freedom from the corruptions of Western capitalist societies and a corresponding authenticity associated with its traditional, pre-modern aspects. The Third World has received further moral credit from leftist intellectuals and their followers on account of its victimization (real or imaginary) by predatory Western capitalism.
Even a highly oppressive theocracy such as the one established in Iran earned the sympathy and support of prominent American intellectuals such as Richard Falk (of Princeton University) who in 1979 thought that Ayatollah Khomeini was “defamed” by the American news media and believed that he created “a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on non-violent tactics;” in his view, Iran was going to “provide us with a desperately needed model of human governance.” Ramsey Clark, an especially embittered critic of U.S. foreign policy and American society, rushed to France in 1979 to meet Ayatollah Khomeni and in the same year also visited Iran to show solidarity with the new regime. In 1986, following the U.S. bombings of LIbya, Clark traveled to Libya once more to show his solidarity to a government hostile to the United States. Clark also volunteered his legal services to the bombers of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and to Saddam Hussein, among other groups and individuals hostile to the United States. Michel Foucault, the famous French philosopher, was similarly supportive of the Iranian theocracy, observing that Ayatollah Khomeini reflected “the perfectly unified will” of the Iranian people, among other enthusiastic comments.
Somewhat unexpectedly in the wake of 9/11, many of these feelings and attitudes found new expression. Numerous Western intellectuals on the Left used the occasion to aver that the attack was well deserved, and its root causes were to be found in the American mistreatment of Islamic countries and populations and in the exploitative practices of global capitalism headquartered in the United States. As Christopher Hitchens put it, “jihad [became] an understandable reaction to Muslim grievances” and even “a supposed socialist-feminist [Naomi Klein] [was] offering swooning support to theocratic fascists.” Jean Baudrillard and Norman Mailer relished the symbolic punishment meted out in the destruction of the towers of the World Trade Center, symbols of global capitalism.
In May 8, 2006, Noam Chomsky visited Lebanon, meeting Hezbollah leaders and providing them with welcome moral support and political legitimacy. He also expressed strong support (on both Lebanese and Hezbollah television) for Hezbollah keeping its weapons — a position directly contradicting the UN Resolution No. 1559 that called for its disarming. Norman Finkelstein – whose detestation of Israel rivals that of Chomsky, offered at an “Islamophobia” conference in Istanbul his sympathetic understanding of Holocaust denial in the Muslim world and argued that it is used to “demonize” Muslims. He was far less disturbed by these denials than by the alleged “demonization.” Since his parents were Holocaust survivors, he did not deny it. Like Chomsky (his role model) he readily equated the Holocaust and Nazism with the misdeeds of the United States. Lynne Stewart, the radical lawyer represented (and admired) Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman, who as convicted in 2005 (in spite of Stewart’s efforts) in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Subsequently, Stewart was convicted and sentenced to jail for supporting Rahman’s organization in 2006. She has been an admirer not only of Muslim fundamentalists but also of Mao, Castro and Ho Chi Minh.
Other notable leftist sympathizers with radical Islam include George Galloway, (former Labor member of the British Parliament), Naomi Klein, and the late Edward Said. Ian Buruma and Timothy Garton Ash are distinguished by their shared scorn for Ayaan Hirshi Ali, the Somali-born critic of Islam and former member of the Dutch parliament, who has been subject to numerous death threats. By contrast, they both think well of Tariq Ramadan, the well known Western spokesman of Islamist causes who pretends to be a moderate when addressing Western academic audiences. In his Murder in Amsterdam, Buruma postulated a moral equivalence between alleged Dutch racism and Muslim fundamentalism.
As to the recent responses to the potential rise in power of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institute in an op-ed advised “Don’t Fear Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood” and Shadi Hamid (also of Brookings) wrote that “Westerners should not lose sleep over the Brotherhood’s inclusion… A pragmatic organization at its core.”
While not even the most bitterly alienated American leftists can easily glorify or fully justify the traditional, repressive and less than fully rational aspects of Islamic political culture (including Sharia law), a number of similarities may be found between their attitudes toward communist systems and those toward radical, political Islam. The appreciation of anti-Americanism and a broader anti-Westernism are not the only similarities. Many Western leftists and especially intellectuals among them have found the collectivism of both communist systems and of Islam appealing given their yearning for community and their rejection of capitalistic competitiveness, as well as their apprehensions about social isolation in Western capitalist societies. They also find attractive the apparent sense of purpose permeating both communist and Islamic societies and movements. The most alienated among American and other Western intellectuals are also drawn to the fundamentalist Islamic rejection of modernity: they too reject many aspects of modernity, namely popular culture, consumerism, moral relativism and assorted social pathologies such as crime, alcoholism and drug addiction.
Authenticity, the unity of word and deed (or theory and practice), is also highly prized by leftist Western intellectuals and their followers and they find a great deal of it among militant Islamic radicals. Indisputably, suicide bombers act out their beliefs, they unite theory and practice, as communist revolutionaries used to a long time ago.
Nonetheless, Western leftist views of the relationship between theory and practice are not consistent, neither as regards communist systems of the past nor the religious-fundamentalist Islamic movements of the present. During the Cold War, leftist peace activists, as well as numerous academic specialists, used to argue that the Soviet Union was not a serious threat because its policies (including those flagrantly aggressive) were largely defensive and not motivated by ideology (by Marxism-Leninism). The West could “do business” with the Soviet Union (and other communist systems) because it no longer pursued a militant, messianic, expansionist policy and because theory ceased to matter, as Soviet leaders became increasingly pragmatic. They further suggested that peaceful coexistence was possible provided the West make a serious attempt to understand the grievances and insecurities of communist leaders – a view strikingly similar to current exhortations to engage Islamic movements and their leaders in a dialogue.
There is a further, striking similarity between the past dismissal of ideology as a force in the conduct of communist systems and the current denials that Islamic religious values and beliefs play a part in Islamic violence although suicide bombers regularly affirm their unshakeable belief in the generous other-wordly rewards that await them. They are confident that putting to death a sufficient number of American, British, Israeli, Indonesian, Iraqi or Spanish infidels – men, women, children and the old, will usher in a better world.
As in the old days, the Left insists that a better, non-judgmental approach will mollify Islamic extremists and radicals – as was hoped to be the case in regard to Communist leaders and ideologues. They believe that adopting conciliatory attitudes and policies will lead to peace, goodwill and rational discourse. It is difficult for critics of the United States and Western values to attribute irrationality to the enemies of their countries and social systems.
Ready attribution of moral equivalence is another similarity between attitudes toward communist systems and radical Islam. As may be recalled, during the Cold War, and especially following the 1960s, it was widely held by leftist intellectuals in the United States (and elsewhere) that there was little to choose between American or Soviet imperialism, between the two corrupt and oppressive super powers. More recently, American and Israeli policies have been equated with, and held responsible for, the violence of Islamic terrorists, who, in this perspective, had no choice but to engage in their campaigns of destruction and violence to draw attention to their grievances.
In the final analysis, it is difficult to quantify the similarities between the two sets of attitudes and misperceptions discussed above. The leftist support for communist systems and ideologies probably greatly exceeded present day sympathy for radical Islam in the same circles. Communist systems – their ideology, slogans, and promises – were easier to idealize than present day Islamic fanaticism, dogmatic rigidity and murderous intolerance. What has been similar is the misperception and wishful misjudgment of both political entities because they meet certain needs and allowed leftist intellectuals to project upon them attributes they valued and could not find in their own society. Most importantly, they have been seen in a favorable light because they shared the hostility toward Western societies and traditions which has animated many leftist intellectuals for several generations.
Paul Hollander is professor emeritus of sociology at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and associate of the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University. He is the author or editor of fourteen books, including Political Pilgrims.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
BBC TV Program "The Chinese are Coming" with My Interview BBC纪录片“中国人来了”（哈崗孔学堂）
Youtube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQxwrHooknU&feature=youtube_gdata
Review: Base British Commenter(BBC) “The Chinese Are Coming” episole2 Brazil to USA
（Kai Chen Note: BBC is a left-leaning British TV media outlet. In this TV documentary, BBC spread the message that China will dominate the world - a liberal leftist lie and a vicious pro-communist/socialist fantasy. Nonetheless, I am glad I have gotten my point across on the nature of the Chinese communist party-dynasty in this episode about Hacienda Confucius Classroom.)
（陈凯 按： BBC是一个基于英国的左派电视媒体。 在“中国人来了”这部纪录片中西方左派媒体试图散布“中共党朝将要压过美国称霸世界”的险恶预言 - 美西左派反美，崇共崇社，反资本主义的共同愿望。 无论如何，我很高兴我仍旧在这个节目中将中共党朝的性质告知了世界。）
Posted on Feb 16, 2011
Justin Rowlatt with Zhu Hanqun, who runs a Chinese plate factory in Tanzania. Photograph: BBC
The Chinese are taking over the world. Such, at least, is the premise of The Chinese Are Coming (BBC2). Justin Rowlatt investigated what Chinese influence meant for African countries, nicely skewering racist presumptions about China as he travelled. Intriguingly, the Chinese have often revivified old British colonial infrastructures. But are they as rapacious as we were? Tough call. Zambians resented their new imperialist yoke, while Angolans and Tanzanians seemed pleased by their countries’ reinvigoration.
Could the Chinese do the same for Britain? Probably not. At least Africans have stuff – copper, cobalt, cheap labour – that the Chinese want. What do we have? Our coal and oil are depleted, our manufacturing base destroyed; our only surplus is celebrities. Perhaps we could trade Myleene Klass and Stephen Fry for an overhaul to the railway network. The Chinese probably wouldn’t go for that.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Milton Friedman - Socialism vs. Capitalism 弗里德曼：社会主义 vs. 资本主义
Candy Wrappers & Social Trust in American Capitalism
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series
陈凯一语： Kai Chen's Words:
Most people in the world are asleep. Only a few are awake: They watch even the smallest occurrences around them with fascination, with amazement, amusement and wonder. They participate in this fabulous world of ours with courage, conviction and enthusiasm. They project their energy, ideas, freedom, happiness and joy onto others around them and onto the entire world.
这世界中的大多数人都在沉睡不醒。 只有少数的人一直清醒地活着。 他们充满兴趣地，惊异地，兴奋地观察者他们周围那些即使最小的事物. 他们以自身无畏的勇气，坚定的信念与热烈的激情参与着这个美妙的世界。 他们用自身的能量、意念、自由、快乐与幸福投射到这个世界上。 他们以自身发出的光照亮他人。
By Kai Chen 陈凯 （Written 9/6/2006, Reprint 2/25/2011)
(I wrote this chapter sometime ago and it may still be a chapter of my future book. I paste it here for I think it conveys an important message. I hope all of you enjoy it.
Best. Kai Chen 陈凯)
Candy Wrappers & Social Trust in American Capitalism
by Kai Chen 陈凯（Written 9/6/2006, Reprint 2/25/2011)
There are many great things most native-born Americans take for granted, or take as some small and trivial matters not worthy of mentioning or even noticing. But to me, a new immigrant from China back in 1981, they are most wonderful and amazing occurrences which in my wildest dreams would never imagine possible.
Although I have traveled to many places in the world representing China playing basketball in the 1970s, I only observed how people lived in those different places. Due to a very strict communist party control and team rules, we could only move around in those places as a group. My family background with my Taiwan relatives serving in Kuomintang’s army put me in an even more awkward, constrained and self-censored mode. In every hotel room I stayed, a communist party member was assigned to stay with me (just to spy/monitor me, in case...). So my superficial encounters with the outside world did not prepare me to live and function in a place other than China.
When I first arrived in America, Susan (my wife) and I lived with her parents in Garden Grove, Orange County. I had comfort and security of a home and yet grew restless and uneasy as each day passed. I guess I just wanted a place I could call my own before I could ever relax and feel free.
I started to attend an adult language school to learn English, pedaling a used bike I borrowed from Susan’s parents to and from the school. Meanwhile, after many attempts, I finally found my first job in America -- working in an Arby’s Roast Beef outlet not far from Disneyland. I made about three dollars an hour and to me that was an amazingly enormous sum of money, considering that I as a former Liberation Army’s officer, playing for the famed Chinese “Bayi” ("August 1st" as the birthday of the Chinese Liberation Army) Team, only made about 16 dollars a month. Of course back then the state took care of my food, housing and traveling expenses, since all the national athletes were considered as very valuable tools for the communist state's diplomacy (They are still viewed that way today in China).
I worked quite a bit at Arby's in the evening after taking English classes at school during day time. I found that working at that fast food outlet helped me a lot in actually using English to communicate, besides learning the difference between a “regular” and a “club” sandwich. The workload was heavy and I remember writing back to my friends in China to describe to them what working in America was like. “Sure I make a lot more money now.” I wrote, “but I now worked probably five times as hard as any manual worker in China.” I think I scared them a little.
Every night after I got home from work I was so exhausted. My hands often were bleeding with cuts from cleaning up the beef-cutting machine with its sharp blade. Susan would bring me a Band-aid and a bowl of ice cream. I would then sit on the couch and devour it. That cooled me down and took my sweat away.
Don’t mistake me as if I am complaining about the hard work. I had been benefited so much more from the Arby’s experience I would not change it for anything. It has given me a sense of reality, a sense of how an ordinary American worker goes through every day, how a salesperson deal with his customers, what the relationship between a worker and his boss is like and how an ordinary American worker sees the meaning of his job… It was fascinating to see how the manager would throw some perfectly good leftover sandwiches into the trash can by the end of the day, rather than letting us workers take them home, and how they hired and fired workers, and how workers could quit at any time they wanted… It was just so fascinating to think about all these new things I had never experienced before.
Even with her law degree from UCLA, Susan could not find a job for quite some time. Once she went to the local social security office to ask for help and came back in tears. She was insulted by the clerks for some unknown reasons. She never went back again. Soon after that she found a job as a secretary in some office. And we started saving our money.
The first thing we did with our savings was to find an apartment so we could move out of her parents’ home. We eventually found one in Anaheim, very close to Cypress College, so that I, having completed my adult school English study, would go to Cypress College to take some college courses. The rent was 300 dollars a month, an exorbitant amount. The compound had a pool and I could walk to the college and a local supermarket and jog in a nearby track. We had no furniture. We only borrowed a mattress and a couch from Susan’s parents. Susan drove her old Ford Pinto she had in her college years to ship the pieces. I found some bricks and a wooden board to build a coffee table on the carpet. A very old black and white TV was our entertainment. I was very happy and content: Finally we had our own place and started our own new life. Besides, it was better than any place I had stayed in China: I could take a shower or bath anytime I wanted and I did not have to share the toilet with 100 other strangers. There was hot water to use and gas stove to cook 24 hours a day. Best of all, there were no others you don't like intruding upon your privacy any time they wanted, like in China.
I helped Cypress College varsity basketball team with their practices as an assistant/player to Coach Don Johnson. The school waved my tuition. My English was not proficient enough yet then and I had to try very hard just to get by in my classes. I was shocked and frustrated when my teacher gave a quiz right after she showed us a movie about Dr. Ruth in my psychology class. I barely got by with standard spoken English and I could hardly understand a word Dr. Ruth was saying in the movie with her heavy German accent. However, I found a way to quickly, steadily and interestingly improve my English: Watching TV and mimic the words with their pronunciation in comedies and commercials, because of their repetitions. I could also increase my English vocabulary and familiarize myself with American idioms. After a while I found that TV watching helped me in another extraordinary way -- showing me how people react to each other. My favorite show? -- "Three’s Company".
After months passed, Susan eventually found a job in a Santa Monica law firm as an associate. Because of the long commute, she could only come home during weekends. On weekdays she stayed with a friend in Santa Monica. With a new source of income, I quit my job at the Arby’s and filled up my time with school classes, basketball practices and TV watching. Before Susan went to Santa Monica, she taught me one fascinating thing, besides cutting out coupons from newspapers to save money in grocery shopping: Gathering and collecting many brands of candy wrappers.
Susan told me that if I could find twenty candy wrappers and put them in the mail to send back to the manufacturers, we could collect five dollars from them. I was very skeptical toward the idea though, being from China and all, because I simply did not believe (not to mention expect) the manufacturers would truly honestly send five dollars to me for my effort: "Why do they do that?" I asked myself incredulously. I was taught all my life in China that the ruthless, heartless capitalists only want to accumulate their wealth by brutalizing the workers and exploiting their energy and values for their own ugly and selfish greed. They would find every way to grab and hoard money. Now they are giving money back to the customers? This was an almost insane proposition. Secondly, how do the manufacturers know that I truly ate that much candy? And if I just pick them up on the streets and from garbage cans, do they still give me five bucks they have promised? It sounded a little crazy to me. Furthermore, if I indeed sent in the wrappers and they just ignored me, I would have wasted all that time and energy. Should I try it?
Hey, I had got to try it just once. I had some time and energy. What else did I have to lose? Besides, if it did not work, then I would stop and I might have learned something from this experience.
The following weekend when Susan came back from work, in front of her on the carpet, there was a pile of candy wrappers. I still remember that night. “Three’s Company” was showing on TV and we sat on the carpet. One by one, we straightened out those wrappers with logos intact on them, counted them and put them into the envelops. We had a couple of envelops filled up with candy wrappers.
A couple of weeks later, the money came. I was ecstatic. Even more, I was amazed by the fact that someone in this world did keep their words and the lies and untruths that the communists instilled in me started to crumble. Something entirely new, entirely fresh started to seep into my mind and my consciousness. Slowly but surely it took its roots: The power of the candy wrappers! It sounds comical. Yet, it is indeed magical. It is indeed magnificiently powerful. Some rubbish others put into my head started to be washed away. My vision started to clear.
Today, I can almost see how the liberal left would point their fingers at me and curse me to hell: You stupid, naïve poor bastard. Just for a few candy wrappers, a few dirty bucks, the evil capitalists could buy your soul?! “You make me laugh, Kai Chen.” They would mock me with their sweeping cynicism. Yet they can never deny what I had been through with those candy wrappers is true. And for the first time in my life, the words honesty, integrity, reality and trust started to mean something.
Since then, whenever I receive the warm pizza from the delivery man’s hands at my door, or the supermarket clerks honor my coupons, I cannot help but continue to be amazed by the degree of social trust in American society. I am deeply moved every time by this trust: People are real! Their words do mean something! They do respect themselves! They do exist! When I call a pizza parlor to place my order, or when I use a coupon to get some discount, they honor their own words. They trust me - a stranger. They trust my words. And I trust them as trustworshy individuals and their words when they utter them. It is amazing! I do expect them to carry out what they have told me they will do and they in turn do expect me to carry out what I have told them I will do. What an amazing relationship based on sheer trust, nothing else! What an amazing respect for/to each other! What an amazing way of building wealth through an amazing degree of mutual trust and benefit! And afterwards, besides a “Thank you” and a “ You are welcome”, no one ever suggests, even to a smallest extent, that someone still owes someone else something. Clean, crisp, honest, cut and dry. What an amazing social and economic arrangement! What an amazing culture of trust and faith! What an amazing people, with amazing dignity and simplicity! What an amazing society!
Back in China, we are only tools and lackeys of the government/state. Government/state are supposed to be our parents and they raised us with their benevolent love toward us -- the ignorant and insignificant masses. Confucius and communists told us so. We forever owe them our loyalty, gratitude and everything we have, because the state and the country are everything and we are nothing. We had never expected anything from anyone, besides the government, and no one but the government expects anything from us. We as individuals are really not sure if we exist at all, if we have any meaning at all. We translate that uncertainty throughout our actions and words. Every yes from us may mean no. Every praise from us may mean contempt. Every smile from us may mean malevolence and animosity. Every glance from authority may mean danger. Every gift from a friend may mean betrayal…
My fellow Americans, think a little deeper and more carefully: Maybe to you this is all too common to be mentioned, or even to be noticed. Someone would sneer at me and claim that I was just some crazy Chinese dude who had not seen much of the world. The fact is the opposite. I have indeed seen many countries and many cultures and many societies… I had lived among my fellow Chinese people, a billion of them, all my life. Not once, not even a single moment I had ever had a secure and trusting feeling until now after I lived in America. Zero-sum game defines all that I had witnessed in China and in all other countries, cultures and societies. The stories of distrust, deceit and victimhood are innumerable. Yet until the day when I was enlightened by the pile of candy wrappers, I had never concluded that existence does indeed exist.
Since then, around the beginning of 1982, people in and around Cypress College often saw a strange creature, an Asian-looking man, tall about 6’7” and weighing about 200 pounds, in his shorts and T shirt, probably bought from some local thrift shops. He was not good looking but well built with sturdy muscles, leaning on a very used, yellowish colored bicycle, poking through garbage cans to fetch some dirty candy wrappers, never noticing the strange, even scared look on the faces of the people around… Occasionally though, people would notice some smile at the corner of his mouth. It was not a cynical smile, but a frank open smile. It was a smile that was emanated from some deep corner of his soul, from some deep pulse in his heart. It was a smile only he himself could understand its full meaning. It was a laughter he, in his quest for inner peace traveling through many countries and places of the world, had not found from himself. And finally he had found it in America. He had found that it was always in him, from the day he was born.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Magnificent-You are a unique individual by God 每一个生命都是上苍所创/歌
One More Free/Happy Soul in the World - Your Power as an Individual
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series
陈凯一语： Kai Chen's Words:
“道德相对”与“文化等同”造成了中国人畸形的奴性的幸福观： 他从不问他自身是否自由与幸福。 他只问他自己的牢笼是否比别人的牢笼更舒适；他只问他是否比其他奴隶从奴隶主那里多得到了一条毯子。 他人的状况是中国人鉴别自身状况的标准： 他人的奴役是自身的自由。 他人的痛苦是自身的幸福。
"Moral Relativism" and "Cultural Equivalentism" have created a sick and warped view in some people's, especially the Chinese mindset about freedom and happiness: He never asks whether he himself is free and happy; he is only worried about whether his cage is more comfortable than his neighbor's cage, or whether he has obtained one more blanket from his master than his neighbors. Others' state of living is the standard by which the Chinese judge their own state of living: Others' slavery is their freedom. Others' misery is their happiness.
Only by making oneself happy and free, the world will have a possibility to become happy and joyful.
by Kai Chen 陈凯 （Written 6/28/2006, Reprint 2/24/2011)
Lenin once said that only by liberating all the people (mankind) in the world, oneself can be finally liberated. According to this view, no one in the world will ever be happy and free, because there is always someone in the world that is unhappy and enslaved. This is "Moral Relativism" carried to the extreme. Of course, only an atheist can have such a point of view, for he is never sure about anything beside yearning for power over others. He will never love anyone, for he has no basis for judging what is love. He will never be happy, for he has no foundation to assess what happiness is. He will never be free, for he has no criterion what freedom really is...
A person with no faith will never be certain about freedom, happiness and anything else for that matter. Fear, confusion and uncertainty will always accompany him. Abusing and being abused/using and being used is his daily experience.
Due to the potent cultural narcotics under which the Chinese have subjected themselves for thousands of years, many have effectively castrated themselves off the capacity to be ever happy and free. Modern communism has further purified the narcotics and rendered the Chinese complete zombies/vampires without souls preying upon one another: They think an unhappy person can make himself happy by saving others from their unhappiness; they think a self-enslaved person can help others to find freedom. Only a complete narcotic addict can have such a view. Only a complete idiot can believe in such a view.
Looking around the world and searching throughout history, is there a free country established not by free beings, but by slaves and overlords? Is there a happy country established by a bunch of self-loathing miserable eunuchs, slaves and whores (Eunuslawhores)?
When I was in China, I had made a promise to myself and my best friend who died from communist persecution that the biggest revenge I would ever exact on the evil regime was to make myself free and happy. Today I have fulfilled that promise. I am free. I am happy. And I think I have become the biggest threat to the evil, despotic Chinese Communist regime, for I will never perpetuate a vicious, despotic, slave vs. overlords, man-eating-man cycle. I have freed myself from that vicious dynastic cycle and from that man-eating cyclone. There is one less destructive element today to ruin other people's lives and to add to the world misery. I have indeed liberated myself.
Having become an element of freedom and happiness, I feel every moment that I am projecting the light of freedom and happiness around me, onto my own environment, onto others. I have become the most powerful person on earth -- I have become a free being.
Do not join in the vicious, deceptive cycle of pain, misery and mental slavery! Separate yourself from the destructive cycle and extract yourself from the perpetual man-eating-man quick sand. Then and only then the vicious cycle, the quick sand, the insidious swamp that have swallowed millions of lives will finally lose their power and disappear into the oblivion, into the past. Hereby I urge every living soul: Free yourself to become a happy and joyful being, before you can truly contribute to the cause of liberty and human freedom.
Only after you have liberated yourself, only after you have become a happy, creative and productive being, the world around you will finally progress toward a better tomorrow. Those who want to save the world but themselves are self-castrating, self-deceiving, God-pretending man-eaters. We have been through many dynasties. We have been through many forms of despotism/tyranny and we have been through Mao - the Devil himself, and the evil spell of communism. We have to ask ourselves:
What have we ever learned? Are we ever capable of learning and progressing at all?
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
The Getty Center, Los Angeles (free to public) 洛杉矶杰提博物馆（博物馆对公众免费）
J. Paul Getty Center in LA 洛杉矶杰提博物馆
Rich or Poor vs. Good or Evil
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series
陈凯一语： Kai Chen's Words:
穷富（强弱）并不决定人的好坏正恶。 如何致穷（弱）致富（强）却使一个人暴露他的真实品质和他的好坏正恶。 雇员或雇主与好坏对错毫不相干。
Being rich or poor has absolutely nothing to do with determining a person's character, his being good or evil. But how he gets to be poor or how he gets to be rich invariably tells us about the person's character and his being good or evil. What does being employee or employer have anything to do with a person's character/right and wrong??
by Kai Chen 陈凯 (Written 7/4/2006, Reprint 2/23/2011)
I often hear people, especially those on the left or the communists, say that "money is evil and will lead to evil", therefore "capitalism is evil". But if you resort to your own common sense and open your intellectual and spiritual eyes to see the truth, you will find that those societies who oppose money and capitalism are the darkest, most opaque and most corrupt societies, and those who adhere to capitalist principles with a monetary economy are the least opaque and the least corrupt societies. On the contrary, they are often the most open, most transparent, most free and joyful societies.
It takes a person's will, courage and ability to resort to common sense/simple logic to admit this fact and thus question the rotten mottos the leftist camps and the socialist/Marxist societies try to propagate.
When I was in China during the Cultural Revolution, money and accumulation of money were the last concern in people's lives, for there is no money, no food, no electricity, no water, no nothing... People were all extremely poor, barely hanging on to subsistent survival. Yet I have never witnessed and experienced more evil and viciousness from the poor and desperate people who, after being brain-washed by the communists, condemned money and everything capitalism stands for than any other times. They would kill, steal, lie, sell their own bodies and souls, pimp others to sell their bodies and souls, even kill, just to breathe, just to maintain their normal bodily functions -- just to have their own body cavities stuffed with morsels of others' wastes and leftovers just to extract a little physical pleasure...
I had never seen a people so poor, yet so evil and vicious in preying upon others, even upon their own families and their own friends. Yet, it was these "poor and good" people who claimed that "being rich was evil, and money was the root of all evil, and pursuit of self-interests was evil" that had committed the gravest crimes against humanity and against their own conscience/God. They had created the most egregious human degradation, moral degeneration, hunger, envy, death and deceits that no human history that existed had ever witnessed before. Yet, they want (even strive) to be "poor", just to be "pure and good". They had persecuted and killed all the rich and then found they were only a self-castrated bunch incapable of creating wealth and producing values. The only thing they were good at was man-eating, self-castration and self-deception via an extreme addiction to cultural and spiritual narcotics left/manufactured by their eunuch ancestors and modern despots/tyrants in the world.
Even after I came to the US, in my own encounters with some beggars and transients on the streets, I have found only viciousness and shameless self-degradation. For example, if I give some beggars a quarter, not only do they not thank me with appreciation, they would curse me for what they really want was a dollar or more. If I were not a 6'7" athlete, I knew for sure they would rob me right there on the spot. So by showing my pity/sympathy for them, all I have gotten is contempt/hatred from them. And their only aim is to use people's pity and guilt to extract some values -- mostly not really in the form of money, but in the form of power over others for a little self-worth, from others. When I realized the truth behind this kind of being poor and begging/robbing, I stopped giving anything to the beggars on the streets. I have realized that there is only a very narrow difference between a beggar and a robber. Both are parasites. They all have no capacity of producing any values, but great capacity to extract values from those who are capable, by way of deception and (or) by force.
In contrast, most rich people in America are self-made people. (Those who inherit wealth from their parents are usually not respected by a culture of self-reliance.) They have ability and courage to take initiatives and risks in creating values. And often the richest people in America are often the most generous people. They never take their money to their graves. Instead they always donate it to the most needed and benefit the society with their legacy of entrepreneurship. J. Paul Getty Center in LA is a living example. It is a great museum for art lovers, and it is free to all public. J. Paul Getty had donated his entire fortune to establish a foundation to fund the museum for the public. If you have examined those richest people in America, such as Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, etc.., you will find that almost all of them did the similar deeds.
Open your intellectual and spiritual eyes, you will find that the truth is often opposite of what you are taught in schools and by your governments. The truth is often simple, often understood by common sense, often right under your own very eyes. Yet it is up to you to discover the truth, to uphold the truth with tenacity and courage, and to project/imbue your truth-finding mentality to your next generation.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Washington DC: An Inspiring Tour 华盛顿 - 美国精神的圣殿
National Symbols and Values
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series
从中国的方块象形单音节文字到 “龙凤图腾“ 到 “毛像林立”（毛魔钞票、僵尸祭堂） 到 ”戏剧脸谱“ 到 ”金瓦红墙紫禁宫”到 “狰狞金刚”到 “五星红旗” 到 “血肉长城”、、、， 中国人的精神世界早已被专制奴役的标像符号的灭绝人性的无尽苦海而淹没。 无灵、无智、无目、无骨、无勇、无睾、无德、无创造的“宦奴娼”文化就此有了外在的代表与象征。
Kai Chen's Words:
From the Chinese character-based syllabic language to the image of "Dragons and Phoenix", from the various masks in the Chinese opera to the omnipresent Mao portraits and statues, from golden tiles and red high walls of the Forbidden City to the Great Wall, from the scary faces of the Chinese gods/saints in the temples to the Confucius statue on Tiananmen Square..., the Chinese spiritual world has long been inundated and stifled by the oceans of despotic symbols that materialize a dehumanizing culture. Soulless, mindless, vision-less, gutless, boneless, soulless, ball-less, creativity-less Chinese "Eunuslawhores" (eunuchs, slaves, whores) who have roamed China since the first emperor/dynasty are the necessary origins of and products from such exterior symbols.
A Nation's Symbols and Values
Why the Despotic/Communist Symbols Must be Destroyed before A New China Can Finally Emerge
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series
by Kai Chen 陈凯
Written Monday, May 8, 2006 5:40:48 AM (Reprint 1/21/2011)
【本文是《SYMBOLS AND A NATION’S VALUES》一文的中文版，http://www.youpai.org/read.php?id=646】
坦克、机枪、火、烟、死伤的人们、眼泪、血、哀嚎、共党罪魁们的无情的无动于衷的木雕式的脸孔、自由女神像、中国歌颂“血肉长城”的国歌、天安门城楼上毛泽东像的无情的、冷漠的，残酷的眼光、、。 二十一年之后，所有的与那一天有关的信息与形象都被中国党朝当局从人们的眼睛中与记忆中清除掉了。 “自由女神像”只在香港与美国幸存延续了下来。 怪诞的与令人难解的是中国的人们似乎也想将那些血腥的景象和那一天从他们的知觉中与灵魂中永远地消除。 中国的人们今天所谈的都是如何挣钱，如何把自己的儿女送到海外就读，如何在中国的官途权途上向上爬，如何不要扰乱由中共党政所维持的死水臭水秩序（如何维护“和谐”与“统一”）。 是的，去记忆起那些惨痛的黑暗的时刻，并用良知与理性做出结论与鉴别却实让人痛苦难受与心神不定。 是的，去承认是我们自己在几十年中赡养了，纵容了与支持了一个罪恶的与压迫我们自身的政治文化与政体制度只能使我们感到自身的渺小、卑贱、内疚、无助于无望。
当一切都过去了之后，只有那些最压迫我们，最凌辱我们的形象永存了下来： 高挂在天安门城楼上的魔鬼般的暴君的毛泽东挂像的注视，贮存毛魔僵尸的压人对专制暴政顶礼膜拜的毛纪念堂，血红的天安门城墙和那城楼上悬挂着的象征专制集权的五星国旗与国徽、、。 现在又加上了一座弘扬古典专制暴政的腐儒孔子塑像。 真可谓砒霜加氢化钠 -- “毒上加毒，不能再毒”。
我经常想到当中国的人们每一天从那个死神般的毛泽东的注视之下，在猩红色的五星国旗下走过，或骑着他们的单车，或在他们的汽车和公共汽车里通过长安街的时候，对那些剧毒的标像符号他们是怎么想的和感觉的。 我经常想到当人们掏出钱包抽出那带着毛像的“人民币”钞票的时候，他们是怎么想和感觉的。 我经常想到人们将如何在毛泽东的伪上帝般的塑像下告诉他们的后代他们在毛泽东的时代经过了些什么，做了些什么，鉴证了些什么。 我经常想到人们在六十多年的共产党统治中会记忆什么，学到什么，延续些什么、、。 他们会告诉他们的后代那些被他们自己的军队，坦克消灭压碎的人体与形象符号吗？ 他们会用什么语言去形容那“自由女神像”呢？ 他们怎么去解释中国的国旗、国歌代表着意味着什么呢？
见过天安门“自由女神像”的人们都会承认那个槊像是根据美国的自由女神槊像而仿造的。 两像都是女性。 两像都将火炬高举在她们头上。 两像都有美丽与尊严的外表。 但在两像的不同之处上却体现了两个社会与两种人们深刻的截然不同，甚至相反的价值取向。 美国的自由女神有着强烈的不容否认的宗教信仰内涵。 自由女神的头冠和其手中的圣经告诉我们她那不可动摇的对天良，对真理，对正义的精神信仰并确立它们是自由的基石。 她手中的象征着对未来的希望的火炬如果没有这些基石便只能是暗淡无光，毫无意义的。 只有在这火炬与圣经的联合体中，自由的象征才是真实的与有内涵的。
对照美国的自由女神，六四天安门前的中国“自由女神”即没有头冠也没有圣经。 她只用双手擎着火炬。 由于对“自由”这个字眼的避嫌与恐惧，中国的自由女神被“中国人”安上了一个“民主”的头衔：许多西方的价值词汇在中国（中文）都有着负向的内涵。 自由只是其中的一个。 信仰是另外的一个。 个人，资本主义，西方，理性，逻辑，推理等等，在中国都有着不同程度的贬义与被排斥的倾向。 然而，中国的人们完全没有理解在这自由女神手里的火炬，如果没有坚强的对真理，正义，自由与个体神圣的人权的精神信仰，决不会成为给与人们希望的光明。 在毫无精神信仰的、非理性无逻辑的人群中，这把火炬只能成为毁灭未来的手段和专制暴政的借口与遁词。 它决不会指引人们走向进步。 相反，它只会在盲目的愤怒和非理性的病态行为中，将不论新旧正邪的所有存在一起销毁。
对“中国人”对个体与自由的恐惧，鄙视与排斥，我们可以再追述的远一点，追述到中国古专制文化的标像符号 -- 那个无所不在的“龙”：
如果说当我们看到基督教的象征--耶稣被钉在十字架上的形象，我们会深感自身的不完美，我们会深切的悔过自身，深切的反省我们自身的失行失德，并由之认识到天良与进步只有在我们真实的认识自身的作为人的缺陷，但不挠的去追求那些永恒价值的时候才会真正来到人间。 当我们看到中国的象征--“龙”的时候，我们所感到的只是我们作为个体的渺小与无助，和那不容置疑的，无所不在的，无所不能的国家、族群与政治机器的的强权。 我们从那“龙”的形象中所看到的和感到的是一个我们今天都在相信的伪真理：那就是无边无际的国权、政权、皇权、族群权是我们在道德上唯一的，去鉴别是非，好坏，真假与正义与否的准则。 正因如此，我们所见所感所接受的是软弱无力的个体意志与无法定义的群体利益对个人自由的肆无忌惮的践踏。
我们自然而然的会由中国的“龙”联想到那代表中国的，到处皆是的“长城”的形象。 这两个形象都反映了那“族群一统的皇权”在每一个“中国人”头上的巨大淫威。 这两个形象都建立在为了那个“神秘的黄色种族的存在”而必取的人的道德的沦丧、人的无穷无尽的痛苦与受难上的。 这两个形象都体现了那深刻的狭隘，闭塞，排外的群体压个体的心态情结。 这两个形象都依存在那座写着“‘我’什么都不是，‘我们’才是一切”文化碑石上的。 这两个形象对每个个人所产生的情态只有一个： 那就是强烈的恐惧感与恐慌感。 这两个形象企图对每个个人所影响而产生的行为取向只有一个： 那就是个体对群体的绝对屈从、绝对随和与崇拜。
我曾在1978年随中国国家篮球队来美比赛并访问了五个城市，其中之一是美国首都华盛顿。 几年以前我又再度游览了这个城市。 我深思了在华盛顿的那些政府建筑与纪念美国国父们的标像符号。 我不光对它们的魅力与辉煌而惊叹不已，我更欣赏由它们的造型而代表的、无形的深刻意义与内涵。 就是那些深刻的意义内涵使我今天骄傲的宣称： “我是个纯粹的美国人。 我生来就从不是一个“中国人”（党朝奴）。 我生来就已经是一个“美国人”（自由人）。 只是我生错了地方。”
白宅 (the White House) （并不是由“中国人”专制意念曲解而译为的“白宫”）与美国国会大厦是用一种开放的形式而建立的：它们反映了美国宪政政体的合法性来自自由的个体与民主程序。 它们的大门是向民众敞开的。 但美国最高法院建筑却截然不同：它并不自开放形式而建，也不对公众开放。它反映了宪法与法律绝不应受公众数量和公众政治的影响。 宪法与法律应是正义的与客观的，并只对上苍/绝对道德与良知/理性负责的。 由此社会才有道德指南，历史才有“向前演进”的方向（而绝非“原地打转”的“驴拉磨与抽陀螺”）。 华盛顿纪念碑的简单设计使我联想到美国首届总统决立新律而拒绝了那些劝他称王称帝的所有建议。 林肯纪念堂用它那独特的风格向人们大声宣告着美国的价值--“所有人被（上苍）创来平等”。 杰弗逊纪念堂使我联想到美国的宪政精神与它所倡导的人类永恒的价值--“生命，自由，与对幸福的向往与追求”。 面对这些美国价值的象征，不论你来自何方，你都会感到你个体人生的宝贵与存在的意义，你都会感到人的创造精神的伟大，你都会对人类走向未来与进步充满希望。
只瞟一眼美中两国的国旗你便看出两种国度所代表的两种截然相反的价值：美国国旗的红蓝白三色与其五十个同样大小的星代表着联邦精神，代表着平等（在上苍与法律面前），自由，正义与勇气。 中共党朝的国旗则用它的猩红色，用它的四个小黄星围绕着一个大黄星宣扬着它的专制族群价值： 流血杀人，国家强权，民靠政府，种族（大汉）优先，个体服从群体，等级至上，盲目屈从、、。 一个有灵有智的人不能不问： 如果一个政府能将其执政机构建在像（俄国）克林姆林宫或（中国）紫禁宫里的时候，这将给与其民众及其心态什么样的信号与影响呢？ 除去使其国度的民众感到这个政府与其前权贵者的沙皇与皇帝毫无区别，还能有什么呢？ 这真是一个公正与残酷的公断与结局：斯大林与毛泽东正是这个无情的逻辑的必然引申。
混淆与混乱，非理性，残忍，迷信，朝代循环，无尽的流血，专制，绝望，消极与无奈，遐想与逃避，病态幻觉，无法无天，头脑奴化，群压个与个依群，拆墙脚与毁灭，压抑智慧天才，打击创造 ，盲目追从，欣赏糊涂与无知、、。 我还可以列出许多，这里就不多叙。
且不说中国传统专制的标像符号，就从1949年起自中共党朝掌权之后所建立的标像符号谈起，不能不让人哀叹不止： 毛象林立，红旗招展，魔尸纪念堂，百万人大广场，大阅兵，大会堂，大字报 ，大游行，大跃进，大革命，大标语，人民二字满天飞、、等等。 这些标像符号进一步强化了中国人的病态心理情结，使他们更感到个体的渺小与无奈无助。 对现实、对自我的憎恶与对过去的幻觉憧憬使他们走到了“默默绝望”的深渊。
我一直认为即使在中共倒后，中国的人们仍面临着重大的重建一个健康道德的政治文化与经济结构，重建“个体认同”的良知心态的挑战。 被中国古代与现代的各种专制标像符号所强化的腐朽的病态文化心理情结是不容忽视的，在建立新的自由社会时的重大障碍与阻挠。 事情在变好之前可能会变得更坏。 这绝不意味我支持中共党朝的继续延喘：中共党朝必先倒，中国才有可能有转机的希望与“向前演进“的机会。 中共党朝不倒，不光没有转机的可能，中国人们的事态、心态、德态必然每况愈下。
“倒共”只能是一场“革命”： 销毁去除毛像、毛尸、国旗、国徽、国歌等专制极权的标像符号不可能不是一场深刻的“文化心态的革命”。 “共后”的新政府决不能放置在“紫禁宫”。 天安门广场也决不能再成为“群压个”的炫耀武力与流血的政治广场。 恶性“朝代循环”（驴拉磨、抽陀螺）决不能在中国再重演。 “三权分立”的联邦宪政一定要用全新的标像符号与建筑群来完整地体现。 新的“自由文化”主导的社会一定要建立新的标像符号（歌曲、口号、旗帜、色彩、服装、标志、塑像、建筑、等等）。
当一个“中国人”站在天安门前毛像下的时候，不管他怎样否认，在他的良心深处他都会承认他眼前的那个形象就是人类与中国历史上最大的、反人类的、杀害了迫害了无数无辜的罪犯。 在毛泽东与中共党朝的罪恶统治下，人的灵魂与心态受到了极大的摧残与扭曲。 今天“中国人”已堕落到不识好坏，不辨真假，不知是非，毫无正义感，胆小如鼠的、灵智至残的怪物。 当人们在毛的邪恶僵尸前尊敬地、小心翼翼地走过时，你能说他们的灵魂与理性是健全的吗？ 当五星血旗飘扬在你头上的时候，你在想什么？ 当你面对那个张牙舞爪的中国“龙”的形象的时候，你又感到了什么？ 是爱吗？ 是进步吗？ 是宽容吗？ 是幸福吗？ 是创造吗？ 是自省自悟吗？ 你作为一个“中国人”在看到、想到我所提及的这些标像符号的时候，感觉如何呢？
事实往往与我们想象的逻辑结果所不同： 大部分“中国人”在看着国旗，听着“血肉长城”的国歌的时候感到热血沸腾，骄傲无比。 但一个有良知，有思维，有逻辑理性，有正义感与尊严的个人本应对此感到巨大的耻辱，巨大的反悔，巨大的悲哀，巨大的愤怒，并由此而产生巨大的动力去摈弃旧文化、旧心态以开拓新的道路。 不言而喻，在此“婊子牌坊”的两极心态与“人鬼情结”导致着“中国人”的精神分裂症与双重人格： 他们可以在白天向美国大使馆扔石头表愤怒，但在晚上去美国大使馆排队签证，奋勇争先。 这是一种什么样的人？ 这是一种什么样的心态？ 他是一个存在还是一个虚无？ 世人可见。
醒醒吧，人们！ 意识到我们灵魂中的堕落与腐败吧！ 只有首先意识到这种堕落与腐败我们才有可能重新建立人的天良与尊严，回到“造人造物的上苍”面前。 只有在中共党朝消亡之后（历史已清楚证实没有一个专制政权可以自己改革、改良。）我们才能最终将那天安门城楼上的屠夫罪犯的魔像，和那具在天安门广场上的被人血浸泡的罪恶的魔尸，才能将那专制血旗与“血肉”国歌，以及由它们所代表的专制暴政在我们灵魂中的污染与压迫统统送进历史的垃圾箱里去。 那时，当我们消除了那些象征腐朽压迫、专制极权的标像符号以后，我们才能开始清洗素毒我们的心态，才能开始谈论未来，才能决然抛弃恶性专制朝代的循环，在道德指南之下向前、向未知、向希望迈进。
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Shanghai, "Jasmine Revolution" 中国（上海）人们聚集开始“茉莉花革命”
Feb. 20: Police officers urge people to leave as they gather in front of a cinema that was a planned protest site in Shanghai, China.
中国的动荡与瓦解只是一个时间问题： 我绝不相信上苍会允许一个屠杀了八千万无辜人们的罪犯政权、一个散布谎言洗脑的、抹杀历史真实的、以一个屠夫毛泽东为荣耀与合法基点的病态文化与政体会不受惩罚的持续下去。 整个中国社会从上到下已经烂透了，并充满了窒息人的腐臭。一朵茉莉花的香气就会导致中共党朝的垮台。上苍确实有眼，确实存在。
Kai Chen's Words:
China's unrest and eventual collapse is only a matter of time: I have never believed God will permit a criminal regime that killed 80 million innocent lives, that spread lies to brainwash its own population, that used the image of the biggest mass murderer Mao as the basis for its own legitimacy, to last. The entire Chinese society is rotten, from top to bottom, with a poisonous and suffocating stink to stifle human life and decency. Now just a smell of fragrance from a jasmine flower can topple the entire anti-human culture and polity. That's just God's will.
China tries to stamp out 'Jasmine Revolution'
Published February 20, 2011
BEIJING – Jittery Chinese authorities staged a show of force Sunday to squelch a mysterious online call for a "Jasmine Revolution" apparently modeled after pro-democracy demonstrations sweeping the Middle East.
Authorities detained activists, increased the number of police on the streets and censored online calls to stage protests in Beijing, Shanghai and 11 other major cities. Citizens were urged to shout "We want food, we want work, we want housing, we want fairness" — a slogan that highlights common complaints among ordinary Chinese.
Many activists said they didn't know who was behind the campaign and weren't sure what to make of the call to protest, which was first posted on the U.S.-based Chinese-language advocacy website Boxun.com.
China's authoritarian government has appeared unnerved by recent protests in Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, Yemen, Algeria and Libya. It has limited media reports about them, stressing the instability caused by protests in Egypt, and restricted Internet searches to keep people uninformed.
The call to protest in China did not seem to garner much traction among citizens. In Beijing, 25-year-old Liu Xiaobai was stopped by police after he placed a white jasmine flower on a planter in front of a McDonald's restaurant that was the planned protest site and took some photos with his cell phone.
"I'm quite scared because they took away my phone. I just put down some white flowers, what's wrong with that?" Liu said. "I'm just a normal citizen and I just want peace."
Security agents tried to take Liu away, but he was swarmed by journalists and eventually was seen walking away with a friend.
Two other people were taken away by police, including a shabbily dressed old man who was cursing and shouting, though it wasn't clear if he was there because of the online call to protest.
Any potential protesters were far outnumbered by hundreds of rubberneckers at the busy Wangfujing pedestrian mall, who wondered if there was a celebrity in the area because of the heavy police presence and dozens of foreign journalists and news cameras.
In Shanghai, three people were taken away by police after scuffling in front of a Starbucks coffee shop in what appeared to be an attempt to attract attention. They were not holding placards and their intentions were unclear.
There were no reports of protests in other cities where people were urged to gather, such as Guangzhou, Tianjin, Wuhan and Chengdu.
Ahead of the planned protests, more than 100 activists in cities across China were taken away by police, confined to their homes or were missing, the Hong Kong-based group Information Center for Human Rights and Democracy said. Families and friends reported the detention or harassment of several dissidents, and some activists said they were warned not to participate.
On Sunday, searches for "jasmine" were blocked on China's largest Twitter-like microblog, and status updates with the word on popular Chinese social networking site Renren.com were met with an error message and a warning to refrain from postings with "political, sensitive ... or other inappropriate content."
Mass text messaging service was unavailable in Beijing due to "technical issues," according to a customer service operator for leading provider China Mobile. In the past, Chinese authorities have suspended text messaging in politically tense areas to prevent organizing.
Boxun.com said its website was attacked by hackers Saturday after it posted the call to protest. A temporary site, on which users were reporting heavy police presence in several cities, was up and running Sunday. The site said in a statement it had no way of verifying the origins of the campaign.
The call for a Jasmine Revolution came as President Hu Jintao gave a speech to top leaders Saturday, asking them to "solve prominent problems which might harm the harmony and stability of the society." Hu told the senior politicians and officials to provide better social services to people and improve management of information on the Internet "to guide public opinion," the official Xinhua News Agency reported.
The ruling Communist Party is dogged by the threat of social unrest over rising food and housing prices and other issues. In the latest increase, the National Development and Reform Commission announced Saturday that gasoline and diesel prices would rise 350 yuan ($53) per ton.
Tensions were already high in recent days after a video secretly made under house arrest by one of China's best-known activist lawyers, Chen Guangcheng, was made public. Chen and his wife were reportedly beaten in response, and some of Chen's supporters said they were detained or beaten by authorities after meeting to discuss his case.
Associated Press writers Cara Anna and Charles Hutzler in Beijing and Elaine Kurtenbach in Shanghai contributed to this report.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
I am only one, but not alone 一瞬间的永恒/歌
Soviet Gulag photo
"It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll.
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul." （INVICTUS）
One word of truth can outweigh the whole world
News Type: Opinion — Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:00 AM EST.world-news
What brought Soviet Empire down was 'The Gulag Archipelago,' a book written by Alexandr Solzhenitsyn (based on the Soviet forced labour and concentration camp system) and the single-handed struggle against the system of 'Apartheid' by Nelson Mandela.
When Alexander Solzhenitsyn was put in Gulag he came out with the best of works, as there were prisoners like him who had total freedom to discuss anything since they were already in prison. Prisons are the best places through which totalitarians regimes are wiped out. Solzhenitsyn argued that the Soviet government in fact could not govern without the very real threat of imprisonment, and that the Soviet economy depended on the productivity of the forced labour camps, especially in so far as the development and construction of public works and infrastructure were concerned. 'The Gulag Archipelago' put into doubt the entire moral standing of the Soviet system.
Great people can single handedly break the system. Actually all of us have the inherent power to change the world for the better. Perhaps there may not be ready ears in the short term, but just as a steady drop of water can bore a hole through stone, so can every drop of human effort against injustice, oppression, racism and slavery. The fall of the Apartheid system or the Leninist and Stalinist rule are the consequence of people's inherent strength.
I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul.
"Prison itself is a tremendous education in the need for patience and perseverance. It is above all a test of one's commitment"
In Nelson Mandela you see a man of immense personal dignity that reflects Victorian gentlemanliness that perhaps derives not only from a chieftain family but his profound respect for human dignity. Hostility and rage of his jailers can be seen in the long walk to freedom. Mandela in 20th century is a rare figure who has translated his sufferings into forgiveness.
Today, freedom movements in the Middle East are dealing with minnow dictators; far greater wicked systems and dictatorships were wiped out by the single handed struggle of people who stood up to these tribulations. I will choose Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Nelson Mandela as two who are the brave gens of the contemporary free world.
When you jail a person you free his soul. One word of truth can outweigh the whole world. David Aikman’s 'Great Souls: Six Who Changed a Century' is a great book published by 'Word'- a religious publisher.
From his unique vantage point as a senior journalist with TIME magazine, David Aikman witnessed some of the most important world events and interviewed many of the prominent global power figures of his time. Aikman profiles six of these figures who embody specific virtues sorely needed today: Billy Graham (salvation), Nelson Mandela (forgiveness), Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (truth), Mother Teresa (compassion), Pope John Paul ll (human dignity), and Elie Wiesel (remembrance).
What all six of these prominent figures would agree to "is that individual people still count enormously, indeed infinitely, in our sometimes fearfully overcrowded world. They would also affirm that there are qualities of virtue throughout the human race that transcend politics, race, culture, language, epoch, or inherited religious background."
Mr. Aikman discusses the twentieth century as through a six sided prism of virtues -- compassion, forgiveness, truth, human dignity, remembrance, salvation. His portrayal of these six people with all their shortcomings and virtues intact inspired me. While we can never be (obviously) a Nelson Mandela or Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, we can be a better ‘us.’
All men have a core of decency, if their heart is touched, they are capable of changing. History is replete with the misdeeds of man. Cruelty and bestiality are an integral part of his character. This is a warm, human and deeply moving book, and you will be the poorer for not reading it.
A small thing can say so much; this is the beauty of art. Nelson Mandela’s 'forgiveness' can be epitomised by what he told his jailer, 'the things I live by are different from the way you live.' Remembrance of evil of the past protects us from repeating it in future.
Please watch the movie Invictus with Morgan Freeman playing the role of Nelson Mandela. I was very inspired by the movie and it encouraged me to circulate the poem ‘Invictus’ here. The poem has been inspirational to Nelson Mandela during his time in prison, helping him to “stand when all he wanted to do was lie down”.
It brings to fore the point, that we are the in charge by the way we think. We are the masters of our fate!
by William Earnest Henley
Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the Pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
my head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds, and shall find, me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll.
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
The greatness about great people is that they stand up against tyranny singlehandedly and break it; this was so poetical about Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Nelson Mandela. Since the Soviet Union’s dissolution and the formation of the Russian Federation, Alexandr Solzehenitsyn’s book ‘The Gulag Archipelago’ is included in the high school program in Russia as mandatory reading so is Mandela’s autobiography ‘Walk to Freedom’ in South Africa.
In Western Europe the book came, in time, to force a rethinking of the historical role of Lenin. With The Gulag Archipelago, Lenin's political and historical legacy became problematic, and the fractions of Western communist parties who still based their economic and political ideology on Lenin were left with a heavy burden of proof against them. George F. Kennan, perhaps the most influential of U.S. diplomats, called The Gulag Archipelago, "the most powerful single indictment of a political regime ever to be levied in modern times.''
Oppressive minnow dictators of today, like Iran, don’t have much moral authority nor do they share the same depth and brand of Stalinist or Leninist ruthlessness. They recognize the malfunction within their regime and are afraid because of it. Just as the Gulag was the biggest indictment in the communist system that broke the back of the communist party, Iran, “the biggest jail,” will be broken by the Iranian Diaspora of the world. Salvation rules human life and behavior. If you look at the lives of the six great people as chosen by Mr. Aikman, while I may not agree with all the names, they represent integrity, compassion, and belief in fighting against inequity. Incarceration, frailty or old age were no hindrance; they stood up against evil to set an example that even the weakest in society has the power and capacity to make a change.
Video: Chinese Police Harrass Journalists 视频：中国警察殴打辱骂记者
用暴力与威胁使用暴力是中共非法党奴朝的唯一控制社会以维持统治的手段。 美国/西方似乎今天才意识到中共党朝的非法性与其对自由世界的威胁。 希望美国/西方的觉醒还不太晚。 相应的反中共行动现在就要开始并实施。
Kai Chen's Words:
Violence/threat of violence has always been the only means for the Chinese Party-Dynasty to control China's society and stabilize its regime. It seems America/West has just begun to wake up to the illegitimate nature of the Chinese communist regime and its mortal threat to world peace and freedom. I hope this is not too late. The counter measures to the threat of Chinese Party-Dynasty must begin now and be implemented immediately.
Wall Street Journal:
"China's increasing use of violence against its citizens suggests that traditional measures of social control are breaking down, leading to desperate measures."
China's Hooligan Government
The authorities are increasingly resorting to public violence..
The Wall Street Journal
Chairman Mao said that power grows out of the barrel of the gun, and Chinese authorities have never shied away from using violence against anyone who has stepped out of line. But this wet work was usually sanctioned by quasi-legal procedures and carried out far from the public eye—for instance in the country's vast system of labor camps.
In recent years, however, thugs acting on behalf of various levels of government have begun openly attacking Chinese who dare to complain, as well as local and foreign journalists who record those grievances. This portends a breakdown in public respect for the state's authority that will be self-defeating for the central government.
This week the blind legal activist Chen Guangcheng and his wife said they were beaten by men who have been guarding his house near the town of Linyi in Shandong province. Mr. Chen had smuggled out a video statement that was released on the website of the Texas-based group China Aid and then went viral, in which he says that the government's reliance on violence can only maintain stability in the short term. He revealed that he was being kept under virtual house arrest, complete with shots of a man peeping through the window of his home. Foreign reporters from CNN, the New York Times, Le Monde and Radio France International tried to visit Mr. Chen, and were roughed up by the same band of enforcers.
The case is hardly an isolated one—on Wednesday, policemen beat and arrested human rights lawyer Jiang Tianyong and his wife in Beijing after they met with colleagues to discuss how to help Mr. Chen. The list of such incidents is long, and they should not be taken lightly. The artist and activist Ai Weiwei was beaten in 2009 when he tried to attend the trial of a dissident in Chengdu, and as a result he later developed a brain bleed. Fortunately, by that time he was in Germany and received excellent medical care, or it might have been fatal.
Part of the story is that more information about abuses is getting out because activists use technology to mobilize support—Mr. Chen's video being a case in point. Local authorities are held responsible by their superiors for incidents that garner national or international attention, but are not rewarded for following the rule of law. Therefore they have an incentive to respond to conflicts with greater force. The result is an escalating cycle of violence.
And the change in tactics is not confined to high-profile dissidents. For instance, urban management officers are notorious and despised for using violence against street hawkers and other poor people who violate regulations. The police are so unpopular that Yang Jia, who killed six Shanghai officers in 2008 apparently in revenge for a beating he received, has become an underground hero.
The irony is that one accusation the Chinese authorities levy against dissidents like Mr. Chen is that they are "hooligans," undermining law and order. Mr. Chen, being blind, has little capacity for violence and has never been accused of a violent crime. Human rights lawyers like the disappeared Gao Zhisheng and Mr. Jiang have been trying to work within the legal system, weak as it is, to defend the weakest members of society.
China's increasing use of violence against its citizens suggests that traditional measures of social control are breaking down, leading to desperate measures. Mr. Chen said in his video that after he was released from prison, he only went from a smaller prison to a larger one. As more and more Chinese resent this prison treatment, they will demand their freedom.
Friday, February 18, 2011
There is a hero inside of you 歌曲/每一个人的内在都有一个英雄
My daughter Alex instructing villagers in Zambia 我女儿陈影在赞比亚乡村
The Left Creates the Weak for Their Power Grab
"Free Being" vs. "Chinese" Series
陈凯一语 Kai Chen's Words：
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.
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。
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
Kai Chen 陈凯 (8/10/2006 Written, 2/18/2011 Reprint)
The liberal leftists often claim that they are the ones for the weak, the poor, the minorities and the disadvantaged. They claim they are here to save mankind from its own selfishness, greed and cruelty. In fact/reality, they are only playing God. The fact/reality is that the left only use the poor, the weak, the minorities and the disadvantaged as the tools in their scheme for their power grab. Mao and the communist regime killed 80 million innocent Chinese after they took power in China, most of the killed were poor people the communist party depended on to gain power in the first place.
The end result of the leftist ideology is that they appeal to human weaknesses by claiming everyone is weak and helpless. They treasure those who claim to be weak and helpless as their own political base. They treasure those who live in a silent desperation looking/yearning for saviors in men to pull them out from the bitter sea. And the left enlarges their political base by deliberately creating, in people's mind and spirit, more and more weak and helpless creatures who depend on government handouts. Being weak, in the end to the leftists, has long become a virtue and something to be desired. As Ayn Rand put it succinctly: The socialists would rather spend more energy on the soulless beggars lining up in front of the government buildings, than taking a peek at the starving scientists.
Throughout my contact with people on the left, I always have a distinct feeling that they hate me because who I am -- independent, self-sufficient, clear-minded and strong. I have had no use for the left and the socialists, for they only present themselves as obstacles for individuals like me on their way toward self-fulfillment. The left never believe there is such thing as a real man in the world who does not compromise with parasites and power-mongers like them. They simply don't believe that there is true happiness. They'd rather believe that everyone is miserable, and true to their words, they are out to create only smallness, weakness and misery.
The only happiness to the left is when they have power to control others and people in their helplessness listen to them. However, their happiness is, as everything they have mal-believed, only relative. When you ask them how they live, they always say their lives are OK (driving their BMWs and living in their mansions), and they are only concerned about others' misfortune. They are only out to save others. While they advocate limitless increase in taxation and the scope of government, they put their underwear as donated items for tax deduction. What a bunch of hypocrites! Everything about the left and socialists is intrinsically contradictory. No wonder they worship such witchcraft as "theory of contradiction" and "dialectics" from Marx and Mao.
In sharp contrast, as I have witnessed in America and elsewhere, real people -- strong, free, independent with indomitable spirit, do indeed exist.
Every time I see a person without legs who finished a marathon with his artificial limbs, every time I watch LA marathon's wheelchair competition, every time I see people with tremendous physical handicaps who refuse to give in and live a fulfilled personal life with independence and self-reliance, I will be deeply moved and spiritually elevated. I cannot help but marvel at human resilience and independent spirit. I cannot help but marvel at human strength and greatness. These are real human beings, not whining, crying, helpless and miserable creatures (victims of their own environment and circumstances) the left prompts up as their power base and heroes.
The other day I watched a show "That's Incredible" in which a British woman who lost her both arms manages to have both of her career and her family. She simply just learned to use her feet to do everything -- driving, cooking, using computers, changing diapers for her baby... I was deeply touched by her heroic mindset/spirit and her tenacity to overcome life's tragedies and misfortunes. She has become the master of her own life, not the victim of it. She has become my hero.
People like this woman with her heroics are everywhere. They inspire us and raise our spirit. Yet in the leftist media, you seldom see/hear people like her. What you hear is earful of complaints from the mentally and spiritually weak about life. What you hear is how government should step in as God to save these people. What pathetic beings and what a miserable existence!
What kind of heroes do you have in your own mind? That may very well tell what kind of person you are. I challenge you to identify yourself in your own consciousness -- left or right.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Jay Chen's Recall Petition 陈介飞的被罢免状
亚裔/华裔用族群认同为邪恶站台叫好是他们专制文化心态的典型写照。 用自己的肤色与祖宗保卫专制暴政的中共是亚裔/华裔人的耻辱。 但“不以为耻，反以为荣”则常常是这些病态“宦奴娼”的丑恶心态情结。
Kai Chen's Words:
Asians/Chinese with their collective identity and mindset which lacks moral judgment are often using their skin color, cultural background and ancestry to sing in praise of despotism/tyranny. Not only do they not feel shame about their perverse cultural characteristics, they feel proud of their moral confusion and their Stockholm Syndrome. What a bunch of "Eunuslawhores" (eunuch, slave, whore all rolled in one)!
Residents Petition to Recall Hacienda School Board Members for Supporting a Language Program Funded by the Chinese Government
By Michelle Woo, Tue., Feb. 15 2011 @ 11:40AM OC Weekly
Jay Chen Photo 学委陈介飞
Four members of the Hacienda La Puente Unified School Board have been targeted in a recall effort.
The basis for the recall? They support a middle-school Chinese-language-and-culture program funded by the Chinese government.
The program, Confucius Classroom, is currently offered at Hacienda Heights' Cedarlane Middle School. An agreement with the Chinese government's Chinese Language Council International--which was voted for and approved last year by Board President Jay Chen and board members Norman Hsu, Joseph Chang and Anita Perez--would expand the existing program by providing additional books and up to $30,000 in funds for new computers or field trips.
The program has been a topic of extreme controversy, attacked by residents who believe it is a vehicle for Communist brainwashing. One resident wrote in a letter to the San Gabriel Valley Tribune, "China already owns and changed most of the shopping centers in Hacienda Heights. Do we really want them to change our kids' minds, too?"
Anti-Commie activist Kai Chen (no relation to Jay Chen) and other opponents protested the program, and district officials announced last September that they would not accept the funds from China. (Previous to the Confucius Classroom spat, the L.A.-based Kai Chen made headlines for trying, unsuccessfully, to get the life-sized statue of Mao Tse-Tung removed from the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in Yorba Linda.)
(A Moral Travesty 尼克松的道德混乱: Mao's Statue in the Nixon Library, California 尼克松图书馆中的毛塑像)
Last week, the four board members were served with a "Notice of Intention to Circulate Recall Petition" signed by 12 residents. Chen posted a scan of the petition on his Facebook page. A list of accusations includes a claim that Chen "believes that the United States will be subservient to China and manipulates students to serve China's government."
Chen wrote about the controversy last year in a guest post on Asian American news blog Angry Asian Man: "In the midst of the worst economy since the Great Depression, in which the only things that seem poised for growth are budget cuts, layoffs and achievement gaps, who could have imagined that the most controversial issue to hit our school district would be the acceptance of free funding and books to expand a Chinese language class?"
According to a petition to reject the recall:
The Confucius Classroom is a Chinese language and culture program similar to France's Alliance Frances, Germany's Goethe Insitute, and the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Language and Culture. It promotes the understanding of Chinese language and culture, strengthens cultural cooperation, and encourages friendly relationships between China and other nations. （Kai Chen 陈凯： Chinese communist government is a criminal enterprise that has killed 80 million innocent Chinese. Do you really want to make friend with the mass murderers?)
Thanks to a partnership with the U.S.-based Asia Society, it is already in place in more than 60 schools across the United States. Hacienda La Puente Unified is the first district to establish the program in Southern California, and it is one of the most popular electives at Cedarlane Middle School.
Phil Yu, creator of Angry Asian Man, blasted the intent to recall in a post today, writing about the accusations listed on Chen's notice. "Can I just say that this is utter bullshit? Straight up racist," he wrote. "They might as well be honest about it and add one more complaint: '6. Is Chinese American.' Most of the opponents of Confucius Classroom apparently don't even have children in the school district. Have fun with your awesome xenophobia while the rest of the world leaves you behind in your drooling pool of ignorance."