From: yndst2+@pitt.edu (Yong Duan)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Some thought about someone's thought....
Date: 27 Sep 92 16:39:38 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <Bv82J6.6FJ@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> dnmao@mich.cern.ch writes:
>Mr. Hou's message once more convinced me that he likes to complicate things
>which should be simple and easy. We all remember his analysis on protection
>bill. It turns out that things were much easier that he
>predicted (I have to say, his and Mr.Zhao's message were successful in the
>sense that all readers would felt that out money was worth sending for the
>great bill)
>

Are you sure that you are trying to make the thing simpler and easier?

>We all know about thousands letters were sent to senators. Who did this?,
>by Mr.Zhao HQ only? I believe more than 99.99% of them must have been
>sent by local chinese students. All these are done following the instruction of
>IFCSS and in this sense, as a organizer and coordinator, IFCSS has done
>its great job. To my mind, Mr.Zhao HQ should express his appreciation to
>all CSSs who have sent so much money to him. Till now, what has made the bill
>passed  is still not clear but one thing is certain, i.e. if Mr Zhao had not
>got so much money, he would not have done anything. From the history of
>IFCSS, we know that without money, Mr.Zhao was not easy to move around. (This
>has nothing wrong since people need money to live, but do not be great hero)
>Therefore, before we thank any 'leader', we should thank first our money and
>every individual's work. With money, we can hire Li HQ, Wang HQ, ZHang HQ...

Contribution from CSS community has to be recognized. Everybody agrees.
It's just great !
But the contributions from those outstanding individuals has to be
recognized too! It's nontrivial either!
Remember, CCP never recognize individuals' contributions,
except the contributions from very top leader. The contributions from
scholar are "recognized" by the revolutional preasure of workers. This
is the concept that Mao wanted everybody to  remember. And I believe
this stupid concept has been widely recognized by mainlanders
( including me ). Now, even CCP wants to change it back. How about you?
Mao constantly tells the nation that intellectuals are like "skin",
and CCP also repeatedly told us "shi3 le2 zhang1 tu2 fu1 bu1 chi1 dai4
mao2 zhu1". And they should be glad to see that very same theory has
been accepted by us. Using this theory, CCP treated intelectuals like
grass ( even worse than grass. )

>I always see people defending CCSA against an 'injustice' of IFCSS HQ but
>never heard any complain from IFCSS. I think the attitude of IFCSS HQ is
>right: This is not the time to fight to each other, this is time to unite to
>do more important thing. I am hoping that if CCSA has any problem, it should
>talk to IFCSS HQ to find a solution, instead of spreading around. It anyway
>uses the name IFCSS/CCSA. As I know, many people sent money to CCSA just
>because there is a IFCSS before its name. I bet we all know the story of
>'The fox borrows the tiger's terror'. When others shows their respect to you,
>accept it, enjoy it, that's all. But do not try to kill the tiger. You might
>succed, howere, you would find you lose evrey thing you have as well.

I agree that IFCSS is doing right thing.
But you may agree that CCSA has no control over IFCSS. The only place
that it can appeal is the public. Right?
I am not saying that CCSA has any reason to appeal. But let's suppose
it has. Where does it appeal. How?

>BTW, Mr.Hou took the example of DC match in 1989 to show that IFCSS is no
>longer wonderful. This is not IFCSS's fault at all. No one could repeat that
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, quiet opposite. It reminded me the glorious time that we had under
the leadership of IFCSS. Most importantly, it convinced me IFCSS is our
organization. And individuals should follow its constitution.

>event if no one repeated TAM event -- no matter who will be the IFCSS leaders.
>This is what so called history. I think Mr.Hou must have been aware of this
>but just wanted to ignore it when he tried to mislead people.
>
>Dongning Mao

In my opinion, IFCSS should make this matter transparent to public. I
read article posted by IFCSS. I more or less convinced that this
contraversial can be resolved.
I was talking to friend about absolute power.
I don't like to see that happens in IFCSS. Concile Committee should
have real power.

Y.Duan
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china