From: underdog@leland.stanford.edu (Dwight "Joe" Pak)
Subject: Re: Why are we different?
Originator: underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Miners for a Heart of Gold
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 23:49:29 GMT

I'm trying out some new names for my last name to see how it goes over
with the non-Chinese-cu crowd; comments from those people _only_ are
welcome.

In article <1993Jan5.145045.2751@nynexst.com> clare@nynexst.com (Clare Chu
Ayala) writes:
>In article <Jan.5.02.56.37.1993.23527@gandalf.rutgers.edu>
>jin@gandalf.rutgers.edu (GJ) writes:
>>Personally, I consider the current Chinese culture the main reason that China
>> has freefallen in her international status in the past 200 yrs, and many CA

Mr. Jin and I are in major agreement, but I would extend that time period
to "in the past 3000 years".  Nonetheless, Mr. Jin clearly has a handle
on reality; Chinese-cu culture is _the_ cause of pain and suffering in
Asia.

>> are victims of that indirectly. However, the Chinese-cu that we hates most
>> may not be real Chinese-cu.

Nope.

>>What is real Chinese culture? The language? The current official Chinese
>> language was not considered Chinese 100 years ago. Mandarin is the language
>> of Manchurian. Manchurian, Mongolian, and many other invaders had destroyed
>> much of the old culture. I would say you may find more old Chinese
>> culture in
>> Korean and Japanese than in "Chinese". Cantonese and Taiwanese are much
>> closer to the old language than Mandarin. I know many Taiwanese and
>> Cantonese refuse to learn Mandarin.  They may have ancestors killed or
>> tortured by Manchurian. The invaders had created a lot of hatred in the
>> culture.

The point is that we are talking about 1993-Chinese-cu culture.
How that culture came to be, regardless of whether it was invasian by
whoever, is irrelevant to the discussion.  What is important is recognizing
that 1993-Chinese-cu culture is the kind of intellectual cesspool
that would make Adolf Hitler very proud.

That pretty much says it all.

>>The mind of people? Chinese 2000 yrs ago was more open-minded. You can find
>> it
>> in the literature. Many creative thoughts!

This is the trouble, isn't it?  In order to make "kind" (quotes intended)
comments about Chinese-cu culture, Chinese-cu often reach back 2000 years
to find something--just something, anything--that can be held up to the
god-like wonder of Western thought.

(Note that I am not claiming that Mr. Jin is Chinese-cu.  So, you 
Chinese-cu twits can sit down now.  I mean _NOW_!)

That's how despicable Chinese-cu society is.  As, I've said so many times
before, let f(t, u) = raw metric of accomplishment.  Let t = time.  Let
"u" be a particular nation.  f(1993, USA) >> f(t, China) for all
"t".  That's for _all_ "t".  Similarly f(1993, Japan) >> f(t, China) for
all "t".  For _all_ "t".

However, Chinese-cu people like to fix "t" at some ridiculous point in
time, like say 2000 years ago.  Then, they claim f(0, China) > f(0, u),
where "u" is any Western nation.   Wake up!

The year is 1993, not 0!

>>The real decline in culture  came
>> after emperors adopted Confucian as the only moral and knowledge
>> intellectuals need to know.

I agree with this.  Confucious' teachings are a scourge on humanity.

>>Everything else was belittled. The emperors were
>> quite successful in limiting people's mind and prolonging their empires.
>> The culture has been therefore degraded consistently.

This is irrelevant.  How Chinese-cu culture came to be so barbaric is
irrelevant; that it _is_ barbaric is what's important to remember.

>  Wasn't just the Manchurians though.  The Ming Dynasty was pretty
>  bad.  They stifled thought, had secret police everywhere.  Then again
>  if you go further back, the Emperor Chin(?) that built the Great
>  Wall was also a despot who enslaved thousands to build the wall
>  and also burnt books and killed scholars.  Even further back,
>  there were despots (near the Bronze age) that had snake pits that
>  they threw people into, and cut off people's arms and legs and
>  let them roll around in the snake pits.  

I agree 100%.

>  There were also times that civilization flowered, like the Han
>  and Tang Dynasty, which is what I think you're referring to.

Japanese-cu civilization succeeded in spite of it's exposure to Chinese-cu
thought, _not_ because of it.

------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Jinsei no imi wa nan desu ka.                Sister, can you      |   \|  |`
Shitte itara oshiete kuremasen ka.           spare a coin?        |    | -+-
                                                                  |   /| / \
Copyright 1992, 1993    Disclaimer:  1 + 1 = 3                    |
------------------------------------------------------------------+------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american,soc.rights.human