HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: Super Power in new century and Yellow Peril
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 07:14:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.215337.9956@infonode.ingr.com> duann@infonode.ingr.com writes:
>
>There were an interesting news from the Huntsvill Times, Hunsville, AL
>on December 11, 1992.  The statements originally are from a India 
>Newspaper, and the Huntsville Time just used it as a topic in the
>column of "What the other paper says?".
>
>=====================================================================
>
>The Statesman, New Delhi and Calcutta, India:
>
>
>  If China's economy maintains its current 10 percent growth rate, it
>should overtake the gross national product of the United States by 2030
>to become the world's biggest economy.
>
>  Considered with its nuclear weapons status, the absence of a balancing
>power in Asia, now the Soviet Union is no more, Japan's unwillingness
>to think in military terms and India's inability to do so, China may 
>well become the U.S.A's potential enemy No. 1 in the coming century.
>
>  The concept of greater cooperation between democracies is a tricky
>one for the U.S. what would happen, for instance, if China were to turn
>democratic?  Cooperation between the world's largest democracies would
>then lead to a not too comfortable feeling in the U.S.
>
>  De Tocqueville, the celebrated French historian and sociologist, gave
>voice to this fundamental fear among the white races of being swamped
>numerically by aliens when he advocated, almost 150 years ago, a strong
>Russian shield to keep away the yellow flood from submerging Europe.
>Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun are etched forever on Europe's collective
>memory.
>
>=====================================================================
>
>FYI
I want to remind my fellow Chinese: D-fighter or not. Wake up, during the turn
of the centry, " yellow peril" or "white man's burden"(white man should govern
other race" songs were singed loudest, China was bullied by Westeners ganged 
together. Right now, new wave of "yellow peril" and "amercan leadership"
is as loud as that time, what will happen?
China is U.S. enemy number one already, if you read those major U.S. figures
that have influence over U.S. foreign policy, politician or scholars. Only in
implicit form, creeping up queitly(in term of number of anti-China 
activity, and anti-china news, etc).

Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:16234 soc.culture.china:32815
From: tcheung@ramius.ocf.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Watching CCTV in Taiwan
Date: 16 Dec 92 07:22:23 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Organization: University of California, Davis / LLNL

In article <1992Dec14.101617.4143@vax.cns.muskingum.edu> ericlaw@vax.cns.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department) writes:
->> 
->> ->
->> ->	** Just let you know one more thing I know about mainlanders:
->> ->	   In general, mainlanders are easier to change their living
->> ->	   attitude by environments.
->> 
->> Geez, I always believe it's the other way around.
->
->	** The reasons for my statement are that: 1) Mainland people
->	   live under communism and communism is materialism. (if
->	   you want to argue about this, I wish you first point out
->	   how am I wrong). 2) Mainlanders are in general poor in
->	   economics. Have you heard: "You3 Chian2 Nan2 S3 Gwei3 Twei1
->	   Mo4" (have money able make ghost push millstone)

About your first point: I don't think communism has anything to do
with materialism.  It makes more sense to associate capitalism with
materialism.

Your second point applys well everywhere.

So it seems that you just cooked up these two reasons to justify
your unfounded statement.

->
->	** You think the other way around. OK, what is your reason?

First of all, there are many kinds of attitudes.  For one example,
most of the Taiwanese I've met spoke mainly English and hardly
any Chinese, while most of the mainland people I met still speak
Chinese.  This is not necessarily a bad attitude, IMHO.  However,
I suppose you are implying that mainland Chinese become more
materialistic than Taiwanese after they come to the US.  So,
you are the one who need to justify your claim, and not with
those two bogus reasons given above.

--
Terry Cheung
tcheung@ramius.ocf.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: yxy4145@usl.edu (Yu Yingbin)
Subject: Need a account in taipei's school
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
     Does anyone can let me use his/her account in Taipie's school for 
  temporary. I need it only for the time when I back to Taipei in order to
  get some information in U.S.A. If you can help me I will be very appreciate.
  Send e-mail : James@usl.edu
                                        Thanks a lot
Distribution: taiwan
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:20:34 GMT
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Election in Taiwan
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:14:34 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science

In article <1992Dec20.210517.29857@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>In article <1992Dec19.225713.1143@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> uang@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>>Big win for DPP. Set back for the Nationalist Government.
>>Yea Uang (uang@lmsc.lockheed.com)
>>Lockheed Missiles and Space Company
>>Sunnyvale, CA 94089
>>(408)-742-2809 Phone
>>(408)-742-6428 Fax
>
>Cheer for Taiwan independence ! Cheer for DPP ! Cheer for democracy !
>Down KMT, down CCP.
>
>Yi-Chieh
When "36%" became a "big win", I thought it was less than 50% and minority.
I could be wrong. You got to be ready to hear anything when you talk to TIers.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:16285 soc.culture.china:33074
From: tcheung@ramius.ocf.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: (Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme)
Date: 15 Dec 92 19:59:20 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Organization: University of California, Davis / LLNL

In article <1992Dec11.193416.22047@crd.ge.com> jialo@dso031.sch.ge.com (Jia) writes:
->
->	I believe there is some differeneces but not that many. I have some
->experiences with my Taiwan co-worker or classmates. I have a very good
->relationship with them. When we get together for party, I feel we are just
->from the same place(China).(Maybe, they don't feel like that??!!..Aha..)
->	
->	I never feel any difference between conversation MainLand--Taiwen
->and MainLand--MainLand. 
->
->	This is just my personal experience. 
->

Hmm.  I wonder either that the Taiwanese you met are from a different
Taiwan than the ones I met, or that you are so sensitive that you can't
feel any difference.

From my own experience, when I talked with Taiwanese (Taiwanese
American) that are very Americanized - the ones that spoke mainly
English and our conversations don't involve anything about Taiwan
and China, then everything is fine.

But for the Taiwanese that still speak Chinese, there is always that
feeling of superiority inside them when talking about Taiwan and
Mainland.  There are the boasting about the richness of Taiwan, and 
occasionally some degrading comments about Mainland and people from
Mainland.

Maybe some Mainland Chinese feel so honored just to be friends of
Taiwanese (a characteristic of inferiority) that they couldn't even
sense the superior attitude of Taiwanese in general.  Or there are
some Mainland Chinese feel so negatively about Mainland China
themselves (I've met a few of these, and some went to the extreme
of telling people they were from Taiwan) that they were actually
glad to hear degrading comments about China.
--
Terry Cheung
tcheung@ramius.ocf.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: shao@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (SHAO CHUNG-SHANG)
Subject: Re: the name?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:24:10 GMT

In article <pkS=fh_@engin.umich.edu> echang@engin.umich.edu writes:
>
>> it is 'now', the present tense.  changing our national name may make us have
>> nothing to improve; that is, we will lose everything under our national
>> name - roc.
>>
>	Your English is as good as mine.
>	So, let me rephrase your statement: "we will lose everything under
>our national name - ROC. "   I am proud of you.
>
>> cs shao.

you can interprete it as what you want to read.  but, please think about,
if it is possible that everything which is under the name - roc now, will
be lost after changing name.
the thing is not as simple as somebody said: i earn the money, so i own it.
if everything is so simple, then why do we have so many lawsuits in courts?
(a joke: one earns the money, yes; but when one divorces, one's couple has
half of the money. 8)

cs shao.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao)
Subject: Distribution Issue
Organization: AT&T Bell Lab
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:21:54 GMT

Dear netters,

	Please make your posting global to the world. We are talking
	about Taiwan. It doesn't make sense to restrict the
	distribution area to be 'na' (North America). Make it
	'world' please. At least let domestic Taiwanese know what
	we are talking about.

	Thanks!

Heng-Hsin
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
From: fengxi@prancer.eche.ualberta.ca (Fengxi Zhou)
Subject: Re: DATA: largest world economies
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:30:54 GMT

echang@engin.umich.edu (Hsiou-Ping Chang) writes:
: 	Those who do not have the statement "Taiwan is a part of China,"
: in the offical documents are potential candidates. 
: It seems to me you have access to a lot of information out there; you
: should not have any trouble finding the list.

In case you are not aware of it, each and every country has to declare
"PRC is the only legitemate goverment of whole China AND Taiwan is an
inalieable part of CHina" when it was establishing diplomatic relationship
with Beijing. And the list is indeed very long.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao)
Subject: Re: Candidates supporting TI need your support(I)DIR
Organization: AT&T Bell Lab
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:18:33 GMT

From article <1992Dec14.091918.4139@vax.cns.muskingum.edu>, by ericlaw@vax.cns.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department):
> In article <1g813fINNcqd@pollux.usc.edu>, mcyang@pollux.usc.edu (Bien-Chao Iunn) writes:
>> Following is a list of candidates supporting TI. They need your support 
>> very badly. 
> 
> 	** I am glad to hear you say that.
> 
> 	   That means they would not be elected.

I am also glad to hear you say that.

While we are making our move, you are sitting still.


Heng-Hsin

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re:    HATE EACH OTHER ? TIME FOR TIAWAN INDEPENDENCE
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:21:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.102520.4161@vax.cns.muskingum.edu> ericlaw@vax.cns.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.200206.4980@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>> 
>> However, I think that to reunite or not to reunite is a decision that must be
>> made by the residents of Taiwan.  No one should be able to force their will
>> on the decision, which should take all factors, including the threat of a
>> mainland military invasion, under consideration.  I advocate a union; I also
>> advocate the right to independence (but *don't* advocate independence).
>
>
>	** You can not love both God and money. You have to make
>	   a choice.
>
>	   I choose God. So I am for unification only. There may be
>	   technical problems. However, the goal is clear.

To advocate for the *right* to independence is not the same as advocating
independence.  Just like to advocate for the *right* to abortion is not the
same as advocating abortion.
From: ericlaw@vax.cns.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re:    HATE EACH OTHER ? TIME FOR TIAWAN INDEPENDENCE
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:25:19 GMT
Organization: Muskingum College

In article <1992Dec15.200206.4980@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
> 
> However, I think that to reunite or not to reunite is a decision that must be
> made by the residents of Taiwan.  No one should be able to force their will
> on the decision, which should take all factors, including the threat of a
> mainland military invasion, under consideration.  I advocate a union; I also
> advocate the right to independence (but *don't* advocate independence).


	** You can not love both God and money. You have to make
	   a choice.

	   I choose God. So I am for unification only. There may be
	   technical problems. However, the goal is clear.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:16176 soc.culture.china:32650
From: linhoo@cs.uq.oz.au (Hu Lin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Watching CCTV in Taiwan
Date: 15 Dec 92 02:34:29 GMT
Reply-To: linhoo@cs.uq.oz.au
Followup-To: soc.culture.taiwan

In <1992Dec14.101617.4143@vax.cns.muskingum.edu> ericlaw@vax.cns.muskingum.edu (Eric Law, Geology Department) writes:

>> ->	** Just let you know one more thing I know about mainlanders:
>> ->	   In general, mainlanders are easier to change their living
>> ->	   attitude by environments.
>> 
>> Geez, I always believe it's the other way around.

>	** The reasons for my statement are that: 1) Mainland people
>	   live under communism and communism is materialism. (if
>	   you want to argue about this, I wish you first point out
>	   how am I wrong). 2) Mainlanders are in general poor in
>	   economics. Have you heard: "You3 Chian2 Nan2 S3 Gwei3 Twei1
>	   Mo4" (have money able make ghost push millstone)

Well, seems your two reasons are not quite valid. 

	1. Yes, communism party has been the ruling power in mainland for nearly
	   half century. But comparing with Chinese culture which ever lasts for 
           over 3000 thousand years, the influence of communism over chinese are
	   nearly zero.  About materialism, i think chinese culture is basicly  
	   materialism. MengZhi once said: Min Yi Si Wei Tian.

	2. You may also heard:

		Ning Wei Yu Shui, Bu Wei Wa Quian.
		(Rather die like crashed jade than live like a piece of tile).

	   BTW, your quotation suits for everywhere, if you use it properly.
	   Am I right?
>	** You think the other way around. OK, what is your reason?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.india
From: tylee@leety.austin.ibm.com (Ty Lee)
Subject: Re: Super Power in new century and Yellow Peril
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:16:37 GMT
Organization: IBM, Austin

In article <1992Dec15.185004.3371@ryn.mro4.dec.com> verma@pfeast.enet.dec.com (Virendra Verma) writes:
>
>In article <yQS=X_+@engin.umich.edu>, chyang@periphrasis.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang) writes...
>> 
>>	Yes, but that was the Mongolians.  The Chinese are inherently
>>isolationists and non-vilolent.  If the Chinese had intension to 
>> 
>>- C. H. Yang 
>
>	Oh really!! That is why China has swallowed Tabet non-violently.
>	Must thank India's Nehru who did not create any trouble, otherwise
>	the world would have known Chinese non-violent behavior.
>
>	And what about one million girls killed, non-violently of course,
>	in the name of population control?
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Disclaimer:
>I express my views under the freedom of speech guaranteed by the constitution
>of the United States of America. My employer is not responsible for any
>damage or damages caused as a result of my writings. I use my employer's
>facilities for a cost of putting extra two hours per week.
>
>WORMA, the WORMS charmer and WORM Abater.
>
>-- Virendra Verma
>------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

People from Taiwan who thinks they are Chinese have the view of the Chinese
culture dated back before Chinese communist took control of Chinese 
mainland. The behavior of the Chinese in Chinese mainland is the solely
responsibility of themselves. It is absurd to say, say Singaporean Chinese
have the responsibility of the atrocities in the Chinese mainland.

I agree with C.H. Yang's point of view of non-violent trait of Chinese (to the
larger extent, excluding the 228 massacre).

Take that in mind then you people from India will have no confusion with
the topics talked. 
-- 
/* The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of IBM's.         *\
 * Take care and have a nice day.                                            *
\* Ty Lee                                                                    */
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
From: Eugene.Liu@launchpad.unc.edu (Eugene Liu)
Subject: Re: Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 04:21:56 GMT

In article <BzH482.8pv@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> achen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (positron) writes:
>
>The way I see it, China, Taiwan, and Japan were all on
>the about same level after the second world war.  All three
>entities had taken a beating and most of the industries
>were damaged.
>
>Japan was able to recover in less than 40 years.  Taiwan's
>"miracle" is actually nothing to be proud of because compared
>to Japan's recovery it is still second best.  China, on the
>other hand, severely messed up and lost a golden window of
>opportunity to catch up with the industrialized nations during
>the last 40 years.

Actually, I really think Taiwan's "miracle" is something to be proud of.
Japan's recovery was aided by the U.S., after the second W.W., but as for
Taiwan, I think it was done mostly by its own.

:E.Liu
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
From: liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao)
Subject: Re: The name? (Was Re: [News] Chinese Students Rank....)
Organization: AT&T Bell Lab
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:03:59 GMT

From article <1992Dec16.174257.21717@athena.mit.edu>, by joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang):
> 
> One of the purpose of the idea of "Chinese" is to make sure that
> regional conflicts don't damage the common interest of all Chinese.
> 

In your opinion, who decide what is the "common interest" of all
Chinese? Chinese ancestors? Beijing Regime'? Or Chinese intellectuals?

How do the decision maker(s) decide what is good to all people? Do
they know well to decide what is good to Tibetan? Do they know well
to decide what is good to Inner-Mongolian? Do they know well to
decide what is good to Manchurian? Do they know well to decide what
is good to Cantonese (people in GuangDong)? Without giving each
Chinese his/her chance to speak out and his/her right to vote,
do you think it's okay to talk about common interest of all
Chinese? If China still does not believe in democracy, I really don't
believe in what is called "common interest of all Chinese."

Division is a solution. Break up China and let each state (probably
China's province) worries about where it's going and how to get there.
After that, it then makes much more sense to gather all interested
state together to talk about the pros and cons of a unified country or
state union or whatever preferred. I would say that's the best gift
China (or Chinese culture if you will) can give to it's great people.
Remember that without these people, China won't be where it is now.
Be respectful to Chinese, Beijing.

Heng-Hsin
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: (Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme)
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 01:57:48 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.192723.30000@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> thuang@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Tze-yau Huang) writes:
>In article <BzFppB.Ltp@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>>
>So, we agree that the so-called "Taiwan experience" cannot be a good
>model.  We also agree that the so-called "Economic Miracle" was not
>due to the skillful technocrats of the ROC-in-exile (RIE).
There are good exerience from Taiwan can be learned, as there are conditions
like Cold War factor can not be duplicated. Needs to be taken into
consideration when talking about "Taiwan experience".
>
>I don't know about this "stupidity" and "luck" thing.  Some people
>say that fools are the lucky ones.
>
>William Huang
From: zhang@csgrad.cs.vt.edu (Yaoen Zhang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Chinese Outline Font?
Date: 15 Dec 92 21:50:30 GMT
Organization: VPI&SU Computer Science Department, Blacksburg, VA

Does anybody know if there is any Chinese Charater Outline Font
in Taiwan?  

Thanks 

Yaoen Zhang
zhang@csgrad.cs.vt.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
From: achen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (positron)
Subject: Re: Taiwan vs Mainland To The Extreme
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:12:01 GMT


The way I see it, China, Taiwan, and Japan were all on
the about same level after the second world war.  All three
entities had taken a beating and most of the industries
were damaged.

Japan was able to recover in less than 40 years.  Taiwan's
"miracle" is actually nothing to be proud of because compared
to Japan's recovery it is still second best.  China, on the
other hand, severely messed up and lost a golden window of
opportunity to catch up with the industrialized nations during
the last 40 years.

China's inability to catch up is due to the fact that the
leaders in China were brainwashed by a drug invented by the
whiteman called "communism".

It is sad to see another generation of future Chinese
leaders being currently brainwashed by another whiteman's
drug called "democracy".



Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china
From: joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang)
Subject: Re: DATA: largest world economies
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:16:35 GMT

In article <lAT=Qg_@engin.umich.edu> echang@engin.umich.edu writes:
>	Why don't you try to persuade Mainlanders not to invade Taiwan?

Most Mainlanders I know don't want to invade Taiwan.  The problem is
with the Mainland government.  I personally am trying to prevent any
sort of military action because I believe that without military
action, unification is inevitable.  With military action, unification
is impossible.

Even if ROT is declared.  It won't be long before Taiwan is
economically unified with the Mainland in the form of some sort of
common market.  Eventually, as the standard of living in the Mainland
improves, it will be possible to have free immigration between
Mainland and Taiwan.  With interlinked culture and economy and people
flowing freely between the two places, it will be impossible to think
of the two places as separate. 

A comparison can be made with BSR/WSR.  Forty years ago, the contrast
between BSR and WSR was extremely sharp, far sharper than
Mainlander/Taiwanese today.  Today, there are still traces of the
BSR/WSR division (in KMT factions for example), but those divisions
are quickly disappearing.  Unless someone panics and does something
stupid, the Mainlander/Taiwanese divison will rapidly become
irrelevant, just like the BSR/WSR division is becoming irrelevant.

On the other hand, if someone tries military action, you'll have
people hating each other forever.  Today in the Southern United
States, there are still places where people hate the North.

>But you never try hard to think about the issues that China tries
>to isolate Taiwan from the international society and eventually takes
>control of Taiwan without the consent of the people in Taiwan.

I have thought hard about this.  I just have come to different
conclusions about the nature of the problem, and the best way of
dealing with it.

That's all.




Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.china