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


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com


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.


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


建立“共后的自由人文化心态”比“倒共”本身重要百倍
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 www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

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

陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

共后时代的标像符号及语言/一些构想
Symbolism after Communism/Some Thoughts


真实,正义,自由,尊严
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)

新标像符号及语言词汇:
NEW VOCABULARY, NEW SYMBOLS, NEW LANGUAGE:


1. 国号:
The New Nation's Title:


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

东亚联邦

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.

新国歌必须反映自由,尊严与人的幸福的终极价值。

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..

各入联体将独立建立代表自己的标像符号,包括歌曲,旗帜,花,动物等等。

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

立法宣布在公共场合展示毛像及共产标志(如镰刀斧头,中共国旗等等)为非法,如同今日德国立法宣布在公共场合展示希特勒像与纳粹符为非法一样。
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.

新国度的个体如在公共场合展示毛像与共产标志应按法律受到罚款、劳役服务等处罚。

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





陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

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


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


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

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


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


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

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


“自由人”对抗“中国人”序列
"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?!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

你真想自由吗?
Do You Truly Want Freedom?


一个自由人必须拥有的美德,必须付出的代价与必须承担的责任
A Free Being's Virtues and Responsibilities


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


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

www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

“自由的代价是相当大的,但自由的可贵是无价的。”
"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”


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

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


Jeffrey T. Kuhner

BOWING TO BEIJING: HOW BARACK OBAMA IS HASTENING AMERICA’S DECLINE AND USHERING A CENTURY OF CHINESE DOMINATION

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:

http://www.amazon.com/Bowing-Beijing-Hastening-Americas-Domination/dp/1596982896/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321385474&sr=1-1

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 WorldTribune.com.

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

转一位大陆良知好友的悲愤呐喊 Scream from the Deep of the Soul


An American's Response to Yueyue's Death 一个美国人的愤怒


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

转一位大陆良知好友的悲愤呐喊
Scream from the Deep of the Soul


陈凯一语 Kai Chen's Words:

BZ is a good friend of mine and I am honored to have him respond to my essay "Eagle and Chicken". He recently had his first child - a daughter he treasures. Now I share his article on the little girl who was run over twice with no one helping.

BZ是我的一位好友。 我很高兴他能在我的“鹰与鸡”一文中汲取力量。 他的女儿最近刚出生。 我现在将他的中文文章贴在这里与你共享。


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

From BZ

Hi, Kai Chen:

It has been a long time since last time I contacted you . Today I was deeply moved after reading this story (Eagle and Chicken 鹰与鸡) below. It's energetic, powerful, bright and warm. I like it very much and I have to say "Thank you!" to you.

下文是我上个月悼念广东孩童被碾死而18个路人不施救写的,是我目前的思想状态,希望可以共勉。 --- BZ


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

宁愿自己有朝一日战死,也不让自己的孩子被自己的懦弱所放过的独裁政权奴役

--- 追悼小悦悦

By BZ

小悦悦死了,一个两岁的小女孩被车两次碾压倒血泊中,18个路人冷漠地从她身边走过,一如对待一只被碾死的野狗。这就是我们今天生活的社会,一个人性泯灭良知备失的社会,中国----今天无疑已经成为事实上的人间地狱。

这件事对于绝大部分中国人的价值无非只是多了一个茶余饭后谈论的话题,回头可以什么事情都没有发生过一样继续他们貌似正常的生活。然而究竟还要发生多少这样的悲剧,才能唤醒这些麻木不仁残忍冷酷的国人。这些悲剧离我们是近是远,我们可以做这样的假设,倘若今天我们的小孩在一个陌生的环境被车碾压,我们可否相信看到的人一定会挺身相救?我想我们应该很清楚问题的答案,那就是这样的几率小得让我们胆寒。但我们已经习惯自我安慰:这样的事情发生在我和我的家人身上的几率太小了,我们会默默的祈祷我们的家人千万别遭遇这样的事情,如果实在遭遇了只能自认倒霉。我们还会欺骗自己,其实自己过得还不错,至少没有遭遇这样的不幸,我们只是无能为力,我们相信我们只要循规蹈矩老老实实的待着,祸患就会远离我们,我们至少可以保守自己一方安宁。

但是,假如我们的孩子真的遭遇了此事,我们会不会渴望我们躺在血泊中处于死亡边缘的孩子,有人第一时间上前救助,我们会不会对此庆幸和万分感激。一个有人性的社会,一个有人性的人,是不会眼睁睁看着小孩被碾死不管的。这个社会一再发生泯灭人性和良知的事情,我们就应该停下匆忙的脚步,认认真真地检视我们的内心,我们的社会,我们的道德,我们必须意识到,我们正生活在一个怎样可怕的时代。

其实我们很清楚,这个社会的整个道德体系已经崩溃,人性已经丧失,每个人都生活在危险之中,今天这样的事情发生在别人那里,我们却没有办法保证同样的事情不发生在自己身上。我们老去的时候如果摔倒了,肯定没有多少人敢过来搀扶,我们的小孩发生危险,肯定不会有毫不犹疑的热心人过来救助,我们如果遭遇了不公和不幸,同样也指望不了他人的关怀。我们只是卑微而绝望地活着,我们自我安慰,今天我还活着,我他妈的就是幸福,我又没有去害人,别人的事与我何干。明天我要是遭遇危难和不幸,我又会痛斥那些坐视不理的人,甚至因没有得到他人的帮助而加深对所有人不幸的冷漠。面对不公不义不幸,我们总是为自己寻找开脱的理由,他是不是骗子,会不会栽赃陷害,他的血会脏了我的衣服,我还有比这更重要事情要处理,我甚至会遭到黑恶势力的迫害。我们只要稍加犹疑,我们就可以轻易回到“鸵鸟埋头”事不关己的状态。而在以后漫长泯灭良知的生活中,我们的灵魂必会感到悔恨和耻辱。

今天发生在小悦悦身上的事如果不能引起全社会的反省和忏悔,那明天这样的事情就一定会发生在我们自己身上。我们有必要现在就保持清醒和痛苦,不断追问问题的本质,反复拷问自己的良心,为什么为什么为什么……

答案其实就在我们每个人的心中,我们很清楚导致社会道德溃败的根源在哪里,我们只是没有胆量大声说出来,因为这很可能会招徕麻烦甚至以生命为代价。但是今天这个社会至此,对邪恶的纵容对不幸的漠视,我们每个人都是罪人!谁也别想在道德的至高点独善其身。

很多人劝我不要对现实和社会太过抱怨,人总要往好的方面看,不能总盯着社会的阴暗面沉陷其中。其实我不是总盯着他们,而是他们不断地出现我没有选择漠视和遗忘,社会的诸多不公和悲惨事件,我只是尽我所能发出我自己的一点声音,多少给予些改变和扭转。我只是想尽量保守我不多的人性,不至于沦为僵尸一样的国人,如果说关注和援助他们的不幸和不公是多管闲事瞎操心,那么那些对每天发生在我们身边的悲惨事件选择漠视的人,实际上就等同于漠然从小悦悦身边走过的18个人。这样的人是我们所痛恨的,我们也应该痛恨我们自己。

有人曾对我说,你拖家带口的,你去掺和什么呢,你难道就不怕你的家庭受到牵连,如果有一天你遭遇不幸,你的小孩谁来养,你的老婆如何生活,你的父母谁来照顾。

我想说,这真的是一个很艰难的选择。但我想我知道自己要做什么,我的小孩长大后,如果他像芸芸众生一样平庸,被奴役终其一生,那她一定会为她的父辈没有为她的时代做过一点抗争而心生鄙夷和恨意,如果她不幸成为我这样了解社会运行构架权利统治黑幕以及人性罪恶的人,那她就一定会拼命抗争,甚至为此丧命。一个是做一个痛苦的苟活于世的奴隶,一个是做一个为真理拼命的亡命徒,我相信任何一个做父母的人都不希望自己的子女有这样的人生。我们今天的不作为不是真正为家庭和后代的考虑,而是借故为自己撇开担当正义的逃遁。如果你今天只想保全性命苟活,那你的子女也就必然会如此,你今天过得痛苦,你的子女就必然延续你的痛苦。

所以今天我在此立下誓言,我宁愿自己有朝一日与独裁政权战死,也不让自己的孩子被自己的懦弱所放过的独裁政权奴役,我希望她所处的年代不会像今天一样一再发生泯灭人性的事情,我希望她不会因为自己想表达思想和有所作为而遭到迫害,我希望她拥有属于她自己的幸福人生。仅此而已。

Sunday, November 13, 2011

红色恶龙的政宣攻势及其对世界良知的污染 The Dragon's Propaganda Threat


Chinese Propaganda Overseas 中共海外政宣、渗透与洗脑


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

The Dragon's Propaganda Threat
红色恶龙的政宣攻势及其对世界良知的污染


By: William R. Hawkins
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, May 11, 2009

A recent expert hearing proved a needed reminder that homeland security is about more than guarding against covert terrorist cells. A graver long-range enemy is funding larger operations and has penetrated deep into major American institutions, acquired U.S. technological secrets, and influences U.S. opinion-makers, as well as a large contingent of its own countrymen living overseas.

On April 30, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission held a hearing on Chinese propaganda and influence campaigns around the world. As scholars testified, Beijing’s ambitions dwarf those of madmen hiding in caves, and the one party state is mounting a full court press to achieve its aims. The Chinese Communists are promoting Chinese nationalism both at home and among the Overseas Chinese, while playing on the self-interest of foreign business leaders and the anti-nationalism of liberal intellectuals to further their rise at the expense of the United States and its allies.

The Commission was created by Congress and its twelve members are appointed on an equal, bipartisan basis by the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate.

The Commission invited six experts to testify on the propaganda issue, but I found the work of Dr. Anne-Marie Brady the most compelling. She is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. She has run an international research team since 2005 studying Chinese influence operations and last year published Marketing Dictatorship: Propaganda and Thought Work in Contemporary China (Rowman & Littlefield).

The Chinese government puts a high value on propaganda work, describing it as the life blood (shengmingxian) of the Party-State. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) divides propaganda into two categories: internal directed toward the Chinese people, and external directed toward foreigners in China, Overseas Chinese, and the outside world Internal propaganda is defensive, meant to support the status quo of one-party rule and to combat Western criticism of the dictatorship. External propaganda is both defensive and offensive. Defensively, it seeks to protect Beijing’s rise from foreign actions that might curb its growth in wealth and power. Offensively, it pushes “reunification” with Taiwan and the attainment of equal status among the leading world powers in a “multilateral” international system. This means undermining the “hegemonic” influence of the United States at every turn.

1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. The Chinese authorities needed to turn this sentiment around. They have used two methods. One has been the lure of profits to tap into the considerable economic resources of the Overseas Chinese for investment and technological transfer. China has drawn in large sums of foreign The CCP was shocked by the support the Overseas Chinese gave the pro-democracy protests that led to the direct investment, with more than half of the money coming from the Chinese diaspora.

Hand in hand with the economic appeal is the appeal to ethnic-patriotic sentiment towards the Chinese Motherland. As Brady told the commission, the goal was to “encourage a constructive attitude towards Overseas Chinese helping to make China ‘rich and strong’ (fu qiang). These efforts have been remarkably successful.”

Beijing’s local Chinese language newspapers, radio and television stations; the Internet, and a China Central Television channel (CCTV 4) beamed into foreign markets. Beijing also supports overseas cultural activities; including the teaching of the Chinese language, cultural conferences, and ‘root seeking’ tours back ‘home.’ Confucius Institutes are being opened around the world to better coordinate the cultural campaign. Beijing wants the Overseas Chinese to reject assimilation into the foreign lands to which they fled Maoist China and return to a common allegiance to the ancient Motherland. In 2005, CCTV-9 was revamped into the Chinese version of CNN and BBC, a 24-hour news channel with a global audience. “The station has been granted substantial resources in terms of equipment; but has no editorial independence. CCTV-9 journalists are under constant pressure to present a positive account of China,” according to Brady.

The state-run Xinhua News Service currently provides free content to the Chinese language news media outside China. As Brady reported, “Formerly Hong Kong and Taiwan-based news groups were the main source of news for Overseas Chinese, but in the last ten years they have basically been driven out of the market by a plethora of free Chinese newspapers which derive virtually all their content from the Mainland media.” Few Chinese language newspapers outside China have the financial resources to resist the offer of free content. The same goes for Chinese language radio and television stations abroad. Chinese embassy officials work closely with the Overseas Chinese media in order to ensure their continued compliance with the party line.

In the West it is often argued that the Internet will open China to liberal ideas, but Beijing has been successful in using the Internet to rally patriotic bloggers and hackers. This outpouring of support for the Motherland was most evident in the reaction among Chinese both at home and overseas to Western coverage of unrest in Tibet in March 2008 and, a month later, in the battle between pro-Tibet and pro-China demonstrations during the global Olympic torch relay. Brady noted that “These protests and the later demonstrations were genuine and popular, which shows the effectiveness of China’s efforts to rebuild positive public opinion within the Chinese diaspora, but it should be noted that they received official support, both symbolic and practical. This development matches the rise of popular nationalism within China since 1989, which has been fostered from the top down, but has a genuine resonance with the Chinese population.” One of the evocative slogans promoted by Beijing and picked up online was simple: “Love China.”

During the question period following Brady’s presentation, there was discussion concerning whether the growth of “professionalism” within the Chinese media would work against nationalist sentiment. If professionalism is deemed to be the Western model which pits writers against government policy and national interests as the way of proving independence, Brady had her doubts. Feelings of national pride are alive and well in China. “The Party has high legitimacy” Brady noted, “the patriotic public flocks to CCTV.”

The Chinese people want their country to be come rich and strong, and to take its “rightful” place among the leading world powers, if, indeed, not become the new hegemon as it combines its massive population with advanced technology to create the planet’s largest industrial economy. Only in the decadent West can it be thought that as China modernizes and increases its capabilities, its people will become weaker in spirit and less ambitious.

Beijing wants to ensnare influential foreigners into the romance of a rising China. As Brady testified, “promoting the Chinese economy and encouraging further foreign investment and trade has become the primary task of foreign propaganda work, particularly after 1992. Throughout the 1990s China was certainly successful in promoting awareness of its economic growth and enthusiasm for the opportunities which the Chinese market offered international investors.”

Other witnesses before the Commission picked up on this theme. “China’s efforts to influence U.S. academics, journalists, think tank personnel and other shapers of public opinion are part of its overall aims in the world,” testified Ross Terrill, a historian and Research Associate with Harvard University’s Fairbank Center for Asian Studies. Dr. Terrill has written widely about China since the 1970s. One of his examples demonstrated how easily liberal institutions can fall for the blandishments of very non-liberal regimes. Terrill told the commissioners how, “Prior to the 2008 Olympic Games, the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard went far down the path to offering a workshop for public security officials from Beijing on how to handle the foreign press descending on Beijing for the Olympics. Not a workshop for Chinese journalists, but one for police on how to handle journalists. The workshop was cancelled at the last moment after Nieman alumnae raised questions. Sometimes American intellectuals are more trustful of a foreign government that puts on a good show than of our own government that operates within a cacophony of debate.”

Scholars friendly to China are granted access to officials and research materials, along with other benefits, to build their careers, whereas academics and journalists who are skeptical or questioning of the regime are denied visas and discredited in intellectual circles. But universities are not the only Chinese target. “Money may appear from a businessman with excellent connections in China and it is hard for a think tank, needing funds for its research on China, to decline it. But the money may bring with it major Chinese ideological input into the program of the U.S. think tank,” said Terrill, adding, “In the last year or two, Chinese companies have started making healthy donations to think tanks in Western societies.”

Larry Wortzel, the vice-chair of the Commission who had run the Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute before becoming Vice President for foreign policy and defense studies at the Heritage Foundation, mentioned that the Center for International Trade and Security at the University of Georgia is working with the China Foreign Affairs University. Yet, as the CITS knows, the CFAU is not a real university, but an arm of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. One CITS-CFAU project is on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, a major issue of contention in U.S.-China relations. Why the Beijing regime would want to influence how this issue is developed should be obvious. But greed can blind people in academe as well as in business. And to further raise concern, CITS projects in China are funded by the Ford and MacArthur Foundations, two left-wing organizations hostile to U.S. national security policies.

Terrill also noted the large number of Chinese students on U.S. campuses. He noted “the Soviet Union possessed no such human bridge into our society; no authoritarian country has ever had so many of its citizens living in the USA as China does today.” Most of these students are working in science and engineering, including on major technology projects in the private sector, some with military applications. As a sign of the deep problems in the U.S. education system, research centers, universities and corporations strongly oppose any restrictions on Chinese students because there are not enough American students or graduates in the technical fields. It is said that without Chinese students, who currently number around 100,000, many research projects would collapse. Of course, any breakthroughs gained from these American programs will find their way to Chinese industry.

Dr. Jacqueline Newmyer is President and CEO of the Long Term Strategy Group, a Cambridge, Mass.-based defense consultancy. She is also a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. Her main concerns have been the military expansion of China and Iran, but campaigns to undermine a robust U.S. response to these foreign developments are part of the problem. She noted that at Harvard there is much talk among American students and faculty about national decline, with many expressing the liberal view that it would be a good thing for the United States to give up its global leadership role and withdraw inward. In contrast, Chinese students at Harvard are encouraged by such talk, making them even prouder of their country’s rise and optimistic that China will replace America as world leader.

Newmyer noted that China is not the first foreign power to invest in cultural propaganda operations meant to mobilize opinion in sub-sectors of a target country’s population. She pointed out that Beijing is in many ways copying the model used by Saudi Arabia in funding mosques, Islamic schools, Middle East think tanks and academic studies programs in Western countries.

Brady was still the most explicit in the information she provided the commission, explaining, “The CCP has had a longstanding policy of utilising foreigners in its propaganda work. This is called ‘using foreign strength to promote China’ Historically, pro-CCP foreigners have been extremely useful in producing a wide range of propaganda materials, ranging from books, films and poetry, to public and private lobbying.”

The Communist Chinese lack the Islamist hijackers' faith, but both groups take the long view of history. They believe Beijing has a rightful role in world history and must displace the United States in order to fulfill it. As the experts proved, they are well aware of the tremendous foreign assets they possess, which may help them accomplish their goal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Hawkins is a consultant on international economics and national security issues.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

视频/美国良知教授:中共党朝恶过纳粹 Greg Autry Debates Leftists

视频/美国良知教授:中共党朝恶过纳粹
Greg Autry Debates Leftists



陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯 按 Kai Chen Note

Greg Autry is the author of "Death by China".  His moral clarity examplifies American spirit and principles of freedom.  I want to thank him for being my friend and for forwarding this link to me.  Enjoy. 

Greg Autry 是“致命的中国”一书的作者。 他在这一视频节目中用一个美国人良知的清晰抨击了西左人士们对中共党朝的绥靖与道德混乱。 我在此感谢他作为我的朋友将此视频转给我。
-------------------------------------------------
Greg:

I love it when you exhibit your moral clarity and equate China with Nazi Germany. Thanks from the bottom of my heart. Keep in touch.  Kai Chen

Kai:

Its funny I got emails from left wing crazies calling me a "White Supremacist" and emails from a nutty German who was angry that I compared the China to the Nazi's (I guess he thought that reflected badly on the Nazi's) and called me "Zionist". Just can't please anyone.  Greg

Greg: 

Thanks Greg for your message. I would wear that title from the left as a badge of honor. Too bad I am not white. That is why I function as a "race and nation traitor" (which I wear it as a badge of honor) to add voice of conscience to this debate.   Best. Kai Chen

Friday, November 11, 2011

“不自由,毋宁死”还是“好死不如赖活着”? “Give me liberty or give me death" or "Enslaved living is better than death"?


妻子遭联防队员毒打强奸 丈夫躲隔壁"忍辱"1小时-最新进展  What a man?!!


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语 Kai Chen's Words:

“不自由,毋宁死”还是“好死不如赖活着”? 你作为一个个体必须从这两个生活状态中做出抉择。 选择中间道路只是自欺欺人。

奴隶与奴隶主共同创造、维持了一个奴役制度。 当奴役制收到威胁与挑战的时候,往往奴隶们比奴隶主们会更为拼死地保卫这个奴役制度。

“Give me liberty or give me death" or "Enslaved living is better than death"? You as an individual must choose. There is no middle of the road. Not choosing is an ultimate form of self-deception.

Both slaves and masters have created and maintained the evil system of slavery. When such an evil system faces threats and challenges, more than most people expect, the slaves often are more adamant in defending such an evil system than the masters.


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

难道杨武不对自己的受害为奴负责吗?
Slaves Also are Responsible for Slavery


中共以匪治民 岂有男人比杨武更勇敢?

【大纪元2011年11月11日讯】(大纪元记者李平综合报导)

近期,深圳宝安区发生联防队员暴力殴打、强奸居民事件,被侵害人的丈夫杨武目睹全过程,因害怕而未制止暴力行为。事件成为中国民众关注的焦点,不少人在网络上发表评论表示,无论是杨武的儒弱还是杨佳的抗争都是中国畸形制度下的产物;每个中国人都是杨武,因为中共以匪治民。

据德国之声报导,10月22日晚,中国深圳宝安区联防队员杨喜利手持钢管、警棍闯进王娟(化名)家中,一通乱砸,并对她毒打和强奸长达一个小时。而她的丈夫杨武(化名)则躲在几米外,不敢做声,眼睁睁看着妻子遭此横祸,一个小时后才悄悄报警。事后,有媒体记者采访杨武时指责他“太懦弱”,另外一大批中国民众将杨武称之为窝囊废。

杨武、杨佳都是畸形制度下的产物

强奸等恶性案件在中国屡有发生,作案者不仅有一般人,甚至还有警察,就在去年10月15日,浙江温岭就曾出现过警察强奸卖淫女的丑闻。强奸案因为太多,所以一般无法成为公共事件,此次发生在深圳的这起强奸案,之所以能成为国内舆论关注的焦点,不是因为强奸案本身,而是因为此案中被强奸者丈夫的表现。

报导称,大多数人都会认为杨武懦弱,不配为男子汉。但在媒体的报导中,杨喜利手持钢管、警棍的细节,只要设身处地想一想,就会觉得杨武的表现情有可原。因为中国大陆制度的作用,中国社会已经日显畸形,在这里,很多人并不具备独立思维和基本的明辨是非能力,所以,在很多案件发生后会出现正反双方水火不容的景象。

事发后,民间有言:“同一个中国,不同的杨武和杨佳”。大家知道,在2008年7月1日,28岁的北京青年杨佳闯入上海市闸北区政法办公大楼,持刀袭击9名警察和1名保安,导致6名警察死亡。3个月后,杨佳被判故意杀人罪,在上海执行死刑。中共当局为了封嘴,把最重要的证人、杨佳的母亲王静梅送到公安部治下的安康精神病院,还改名为刘亚玲。

杨佳袭警案由于司法过程缺少透明性和公正性,当时受到来自各界,包括西方社会的质疑和指责。而“壮士杨佳”的名言:“你不给我一个说法,我就给你一个说法”流传至今。

虽然杨佳事件的背后,有太多的复杂背景,以及公权力对普通公民权利的侵害,但民间对杨佳和杨武的态度并非一个正常社会所应有的理性态度。应该思索的是在一个极权社会,人们的价值观和性格为什么会扭曲,为什么会产生杨佳和杨武?

百姓评论:中共以匪治民 每个人都是杨武

杨武案持续发酵,成为网络上的热门话题,从大陆媒体对陈光诚、艾未未事件等公共事件的态度以及小悦悦事件中司机的狠毒和路人的冷漠来看,比杨武坚强的男人并不多,在基本人权都无法保障的今天,除了那些敢于跟黑恶势力抗争的人之外,其他人都是“窝囊废”。

中国民众肖勇表示:“我认为有85%以上的中国人是杨武,杨武面对的是妻子被奸不敢吭声,而我们又何尝不是一样?我们面对三聚氰胺、汶川地震、动车事故、强拆强征、计划生育迫害、疫苗受害儿童、陈光诚一家自由被剥夺时,又有几个人站出来对强权说不了呢?别说事不关己的话,这些事都和我们每一个人息息相关!”

民众@ranyunfei:“懦弱不可耻,爱上懦弱比较可耻,爱上懦弱将其合理化是耻上加耻,爱上懦弱并鄙视那些要保住做人底线的反抗者很可耻。做人质被绑架不可耻,爱上绑架者比较可耻,爱上绑架者并为自己的懦弱开脱耻上加耻,爱上绑架者且视那些不屈的反抗者为怪物很可耻。这与制度有关,但决定者还是人。”

民众@qiumazha:“勇敢是杨佳的墓志铭;懦弱是杨武的准活证。无论你选择哪一个,都逃不脱被镇压的命——不是被恶法枪毙,就是被口水溺死。这就是中国的现实。”

民众Suyutong:“同样的天朝,不一样的杨佳和杨武,杨佳牺牲三周年纪念日,11月26日,你不给我一个说法,我就给你一个说法。”

民众@kunlunfeng:“‘上帝亦救不了不自救之人。’仅以此语送给既同情杨武,又理解杨大侠的人们。中庸与矜持是你们的美德,但美德之人少有不装逼的,因为死亡本身就不是一件矜持的事情。”

民众@shenzhen_litie:“看看杨武的事情,看看小悦悦事件,就应该知道几年前附图文字中那段话‘这说明人们不敢站出来,已不是道德问题,这已是一种特定牢笼下形成的文化。不要再对其他人发难,觉得正确就自己站出来!’”

民众@staciezy:“官方回应称施暴的联防队员为临时工,你们敢不敢有点新藉口啊?干脆把中国那7千万全认证为临时工得了,免得每次都要说一次费事!”

民众@MyDF:“深圳联防队员打砸强奸一案衍生新鲜词汇:以匪治民。”

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

陈凯访谈/六四死伤人员家属应索赔并呼吁良知 Kai Chen Interview/An Individual's Effort Makes Difference


六四死伤人员家属应索赔并呼吁良知 An Individual's Effort Makes Difference


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯访谈/六四死伤人员家属应索赔并呼吁良知
Kai Chen Interview/An Individual's Effort Makes Difference


新唐人电视 www.ntdtv.com 2011-11-10 01:00

http://www.ntdtv.com/xtr/gb/2011/11/10/atext615478.html.-【禁闻】法院代官方拒绝六四难属索赔申诉.html

【新唐人2011年11月10日讯】

四川省高级人民法院,正式回复六四死难者家属唐德英,表示不会对唐德英儿子周国聪死于六四事件一事,进行任何国家赔偿。外界指出,这是中共当局首次以官方名义,拒绝六四死难者家属的赔偿申请。因发布周国聪狱中照片,在2000年被捕入狱的《六四天网》负责人黄琦表示,他们目前正联系一些人权律师,义务为唐德英进行法律的诉讼,向当局提出起诉。

唐德英女士是在今年早些时候向法院提交赔偿申请,当局拖延了四个多月才予以答复。四川省高级人民法院11月8号明确拒绝唐德英,不会对六四死难者进行任何国家赔偿。

当年的六四学生表示,因为六四不是一个个人的问题,它是属于中共在政治上,牵扯追究历史方面相当大的一个事件,中共不会轻易的让步。

六四学生:“中共为什么不会轻易的在六四上让步呢?因为六四被平反的话,很可能跟着法轮功啊!反右啊!这些都牵扯要平反,共产党执政合法性就不存在了。所以,它(共产党)为了维护它的统治,不会轻易的平反。”

《六四天网》负责人黄琦曾报导过,周国聪是1989年政治风波的众多死难者之一。 1989年6月6号,周国聪在成都天府广场被抓到成都市宁夏街派出所内,年仅15岁。据可靠的消息和图片证明,他是在看守所内被打死。之后,当局并没有通知他的母亲唐德英,就把孩子火化了。

为了查清周国聪的死因,追究有关人员的刑事责任,赔偿经济损失。唐德英进行了持续20多年的上访维权。但是,从成都市到四川省,乃至于公安部,国务院信访办,全国人大等部门,都没有对周国聪事件作出正面和积极回答。直到2006年,政府给她7万元钱困难补助的书面报告,但唐德英没有接受。

〝六四〞赔偿案同时也引起美国政府的高度关注。前中国男篮国家队队员、现反共自由活动家陈凯认为,这位母亲坚持20年上诉,是一个非常重要的行为标志,是在光天化日之下暴露中共当时的罪行。

陈凯:“如果所有在天安们的受害者的家属们,能够同时出来,起诉当时的中共政府非法开枪,你在中国的法院,就不得不承认这件事情真实发生。虽然它们政府拒绝了这件事情,拒绝赔偿,或者拒绝怎么样,但是拒绝的前提使他们承认这件事情发生了,这个本身对中共就是最大的揭露。”

陈凯表示,自从六四以后,中共政府就有步骤的、有计划的在人们的记忆中抹杀人们对六四的记忆,所以中共拒绝追究事实真相,给予赔偿;拒绝作出一个交待,这就是它一贯的专制。


今年〝六四〞前夕,〝天安门母亲〞发表《不容亵渎〝六四〞亡灵、不容损害〝六四〞难属的人格尊严》公开信。公开信中首度披露公安人员在今年先后3次找到一名〝六四死难家属〞私下沟通,不谈真相和责任,只谈金钱赔偿问题,表示只针对个人,不涉及群体,不要让〝天安门母亲〞丁子霖知道等,当局的做法遭到〝天安门母亲〞们的抵制。她们表示,不要以为钱可以解决一切问题。

〝天安门母亲〞运动,是前中国人民大学哲学系副教授丁子霖等人发起,由一群〝六四事件〞中遇害者的母亲组成,从2000年年初开始,目前共有127名成员。这个组织及成员经常受到当局骚挠,公开悼念〝六四〞遇害亲人的活动也常遭禁止。

新唐人记者陈汉、唐睿、王明宇采访报导。

民族主义的丑陋与邪恶 The Evil of Nationalism (China's "People Racism")


Duke student Grace Wang and Chinese nationalist mobs 王千源与中国愤青


陈凯博客www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

民族主义的丑陋与邪恶
The Evil of Nationalism (China's "People Racism")


价值一语: Words of Value:
What is evil? -- Whatever springs from weakness. --- Frederich Wilhelm Nietzsche

什么是邪恶? 邪恶就是那些由于我们的怯懦与软弱而滋生出来的一切。 --- Frederich Wilhelm Nietzsche


************************************

By Kai Chen 陈凯 (Reprint 9/30/2011)

I have been thinking about this topic for a long time and I think it is time for me to say something about "Nationalism" - "民族主义"(People Racism as it is called in China)。

民族主义(People Racism): There is no such term in English. The closest to it is "Nationalism", based on the term Nation. But Nation means 国家。 Nationalism should mean "国家主义”。 民族 is a Chinese invention which means "People Race", aimed at legitimizing the Chinese regime which governs a country composed of many racial/ethnic groups.

“种族主义” (Racism), has been rejected world-wide and therefore has a bad name. So the Chinese decide to put a term "people' in it so it sounds better, just as everything in a Communist nation has a title "people" in it, ie. People's Republic, People's Daily, People's Congress, etc.

"民" (people), has long become a value laden term in China's communist regime. No matter what, everything that has a "people" above it must be good and right. So by this logic, putting a "people" before "racism" makes "Racism" sound legitimate. Using "民”to suppress "人“ (Using people to suppress humans), "以民压人", has long been a Chinese tradition. And using "people" combined with "race" is even more effective to suppress humanity in China.

All the Chinese morals and ethics stops at the border of China, all the righteousness of Chinese people somehow starts with their skin color (race) and their culture (people). I have never seen a passionate Chinese with individual dignity and integrity. I have forever seen paranoid and pathelogical Chinese when they see their National Flag and hear their National Anthem.

Many of my so called anti-communist friends and colleagues somehow all sided with the Communist regime when the matters such as the Hainai "airplane collision incident", the US mistakenly bombing the Chinese embassy, the matter of Japan joining the UN security council, demanding Japanese apology... etc. arise. Somehow they are all too willing to act as "义和团“,Boxers in the 19th century, though they hate the regime, they are willing to support it when facing a foreign country and foreigners in general. I have broken off with quite a few of my so called "friends" for I have failed to see that there is a common ground of humanity and decency between us.

The pathology extends to the degree that the Chinese are willing to tolerate Mao and the Communist regime when they have killed 80 million Chinese. Because of fear and a twisted moral code, the Chinese are invariably turn a blind eye to the atrocities and murderous mayhem committed by the Chinese government and regimes. They just bury their heads in the sand when the atrocity happens, playing their Majiang, exercising with their "Taichi", drinking their tea and hiding in their huts... But when there is some done by a foreigner to a Chinese, such as a mistreatment of a border patrol officer in Canada over a misunderstanding by a Chinese tourist, or some Japanese schools omit the Japanese war crimes.., the Chinese turn berserc, and they somehow are outraged to see a neighbor's kid pissing on their fence but keep their silence when their parents are raping their children, or committed family incest, or murdering their own for nothing.

The pathology of the Chinese "民族主义”, Chinese Nationalism, is now the main reason why the Communist regime stays in power. Communism itself has become somehow irrelevent even in a Communist society. It is this pathological "Nationalism" and a mysterious "Socialism" now that sustain China and the Chinese Communist Party. Putting nationalism and socialism together, you get "National Socialism" - "Nazism". This is exactly what is happening now, much as what was happening during WWII in Germany. A Nationalist ferver combined with Socialism doctrine gave rise to Hitler and Racist Nazi Regime.

This is exactly what is happening now in the Chinese Psyche and mindset. Chinese Nationalism has long become the shield and foundation for the post Mao communist regime. Dominating Asians and Asia, conquering Taiwan, challenging America and Western democracies and institutions, enslaving their own population's mind and heart, prolonging the life of a repressive regime, propagating a Chinese style Nazism based on the despotic Chinese tradition and culture, corrupting the souls and minds of millions of Chinese and making them nothing but the tools, soldiers, slaves and sacrifices on the Communist "Big Family's Altar"..., have all become the National agenda for the Chinese regime.

Ironically, the Chinese, due to their language, culture, social and political up-bringings, are blind to where they are heading. In their own mind, they are building a "Great Chinese Nation". They equate "China rising" with "Evil rising", for they have no moral absolute. Everything is relative to them, relative to Power, no matter if it is morality, value, culture, nation, human beings, life, truth, liberty, justice... The Chinese see it all in a relative term. Only "power" is absolute and they believe so: "Whoever wins is the King. Whoever loses are the bandits." The Chinese believe the world is revolving around only one thing "Absolute Power of the Collective over the Individuals" and "Absolute Power of the Strong over the Weak". This is their moral foundation. In this world, only "Them vs. Us", "Strong vs. Weak", "China vs. Foreigners" exist as their moral doctrine.

Trampling on individuals, on individual freedom and rights, on individual interests and happiness is considered legitimate all in the name of perserving the "Chinese Nation", the Chinese culture, the Chinese "people race" "民族“. Everyone of the Chinese is nothing and in jeopody of being sacrificed against his or her will, for "民族” is the only dictator to judge their worth and decide their fate. And the Chinese culture has been established to educate and propagate this "民族主义“so everyone should be willing to sacrifice their lives for this Nation, this Culture, this Tradition, this Authority, this Collective. The narcotics of Chinese "民族主义”has been purified for thousands of years, and its potency is unprecedented.

Even in this forum, I have witnessed and sensed tremondous effect of "Nationalist Narcotics" and its poisonous effect. People are unwilling and unable to judge what is right and wrong, good and evil, truth or falsehood by themselves, by their own individual conscience, by their own individual values. They tie themselves on the war-machine of Chinese Nation hijacked perpetually by Chinese despotism, so they can feel a little sense of moral certainty. As individuals, their lives somehow have no meaning, but as Chinese, they will always be proud. Pity.

Friday, November 4, 2011

千万不要走入中国式教育的歧途 Lessons From China And Singapore


China's Elementary School Pressure 中国教育制度中的非人化

Singapore and China are terrible models of education for any nation that aspires to remain a pluralistic democracy.

陈凯一语  Kai Chen's Words:

中国式“记忆填鸭灌尿盆”的教育是孔儒的为专制制造奴隶工具的基点组成环节。 奥巴马及美左对这种教育模式的青睐是不足为怪的。 “人与个体只是政府与强权的工具”是中共党奴朝与美左共通的邪恶病态的哲学基点。 削弱中式教育与中文的病态影响是所有热爱自由的人们应努力而为的,不是相反。 “孔学院”与“孔学堂”正是中共党奴朝散布其奴役哲学的理想场所。

The perverse educational system in China and Singapore is based upon the very premise of Oriental Despotism - individual human beings are nothing but the tools and slaves of those in power and the government. Obama and people like him in America admire such an educational system as China's, for they think like the Chinese despots. The truth is a perverse educational system (including the influence of the Chinese character-based syllabic language) like China's or Singapore's is what we as freedom-loving people should do everything we can to avoid and to diminish, not the opposite. Confucius Institutes and Classrooms by the Chinese communist regime are exactly the ideal evil instruments to enlave human mind.

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

陈凯博客: www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

Lessons From China And Singapore
千万不要走入中国式教育的歧途


by Martha C. Nussbaum

Singapore and China are terrible models of education for any nation that aspires to remain a pluralistic democracy.

July 1, 2010 Martha C. Nussbaum is professor of law and philosophy at the University of Chicago. She is the author, most recently, of From Disgust to Humanity: Sexual Orientation and the Constitution.

American leaders, impressed by the economic success of Singapore and China, frequently sound envious when talking about those countries' educational systems. President Obama, for example, invoked Singapore in a March 2009 speech, saying that educators there "are spending less time teaching things that don't matter, and more time teaching things that do. They are preparing their students not only for high school or college, but for a career. We are not." New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof regularly praises China, writing (on the eve of the Beijing Olympics) that "today, it's the athletic surge that dazzles us, but China will leave a similar outsize footprint in the arts, in business, in science, in education" — implying his strong approval of China's educational practices, even in an article in which he decries the Chinese government's ferocious opposition to political dissent. But Obama and Kristof and all the other U.S. proponents of Singapore and China's educational systems apparently aren't thinking very hard about the relationship of those policies to democratic debate and democratic autonomy. Indeed, they are glorifying that which does not deserve praise.

What do educators in Singapore and China do? By their own internal accounts, they do a great deal of rote learning and "teaching to the test." Even if our sole goal was to produce students who would contribute maximally to national economic growth — the primary, avowed goal of education in Singapore and China — we should reject their strategies, just as they themselves have rejected them. In recent years, both nations have conducted major educational reforms, concluding that a successful economy requires nourishing analytical abilities, active problem-solving, and the imagination required for innovation. In other words, neither country has adopted a broader conception of education's goal, but both have realized that even that narrow goal of economic enrichment is not well served by a system focused on rote learning. In 2001, the Chinese Ministry of Education proposed a "New Curriculum" that is supposed to "[c]hange the overemphasis on … rote memorization and mechanical drill. Promote instead students' active participation, their desire to investigate, and eagerness … to analyze and solve problems."

Singapore, similarly, reformed its education policy in 2003 and 2004, allegedly moving away from rote learning toward a more "child-centered" approach in which children are understood as "proactive agents." Rejecting "repetitious exercises and worksheets," the reformed curriculum conceives of teachers as "co-learners with their students, instead of providers of solutions." It emphasizes both analytical ability and "aesthetics and creative expression, environmental awareness … and self and social awareness." The language used in both of these reforms harks back to the ideas of the great progressive educators John Dewey and Rabindranath Tagore, both of whom visited China, and both of whom once had considerable influence throughout East Asia. Singapore and China are trying to move toward open-ended progressive education that cultivates student creativity — just as we seem to be moving away, with the increasing emphasis on teaching to the test that has been the result of No Child Left Behind.

Observers of current practices in both Singapore and China conclude that the reforms have not really been implemented. Teacher pay is still linked to test scores, and thus the incentive structure to effectuate real change is lacking. In general, it's a lot easier to move toward rote learning than to move away from it, since teaching of the sort Dewey and Tagore recommended requires resourcefulness and perception, and it is always easier to follow a formula.

Moreover, the reforms are cabined by these authoritarian nations' fear of true critical freedom. In Singapore, nobody even attempts to use the new techniques when teaching about politics and contemporary problems. "Citizenship education" typically takes the form of analyzing a problem, proposing several possible solutions, and then demonstrating how the one chosen by government is the right one for Singapore. In universities, some instructors attempt a more genuinely open approach, but the government has a way of suing professors for libel if they criticize the government in class, and even a small number of high-profile cases chills debate. One professor of communications (who has since left Singapore) reported on a recent attempt to lead a discussion of the libel suits in her class: "I can feel the fear in the room. …You can cut it with a knife." Nor are foreign visitors immune: NYU's film school has been encouraged to set up a Singapore branch, but informed that films made in the program may not be shown outside the campus. China, needless to say, does not foster creative thinking or critical analysis when it comes to the political system.

It is time to take off the rose-colored glasses. Singapore and China are terrible models of education for any nation that aspires to remain a pluralistic democracy. They have not succeeded on their own business-oriented terms, and they have energetically suppressed imagination and analysis when it comes to the future of the nation and the tough choices that lie before it. If we want to turn to Asia for models, there are better ones to be found: Korea's humanistic liberal arts tradition, and the vision of Tagore and like-minded Indian educators. I'll take up their more enlightened approaches in my next column.