“There would be a euphoria in the Japanese leadership with the news that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is hospitalized,” commented the man in the street. I enquire why, and he replied that Daw Suu, is not only a thorn to the Junta but also to the Asians and he reasoned that the Burmese army was founded in Japan and the Japanese leaders has all the time supported them, as even now they prevented Burma from putting in the UNSC agenda, lest the former would take action and the Burmese army would be no where. He sadly added that the inhuman cruel ways, which the Japanese Kampeti had taught to the Burmese army during the Second World War was being brush up and augmented by the Burmese tatmadaw (armed forces) up to this day. He lamented that these sons of the Sun would not be able to comprehend of how the tatmadaw can mechanize an assassination that look like an accident, such as putting lead water (which can lead to slow death, that has been practices so much on the political prisoners inside jails) in the water pipe line that flows into Daw Suu’s residence.

As an average man his hypothesis seems to be strong and I dared not defend the Asian morality now that both giant neighbors like China and India, not to mention ASEAN countries, have come out strongly on the side of the Burmese Junta vis a vis the Burmese Democracy Movement. The last nail in the coffin being what the Indian leaders (the biggest democratic country in the world) said, that they could not export democracy to Burma. Knowing full well that the world would be a far better place if democracy spreads, the Indian leaders seems to shudder at the thought that they would not be able to sell arms to Burma, if democracy flourish in that country. May be one version of Asian values similar to the Constructive Engagement.

There are more intriguing issues to explore within this context of Asian values. How can the region of Asia, comprising of some many different cultures and customs be grouped together to form the “Asian values”, to represent the combine image of Asian society? Do “Asian values” exist as something definably different from the hegemonic culture of “Western values”? Can we explain this phenomenon in the concepts of the clash of civilizations? What is the significance of the concepts of social structure in explaining human behavior that varies within the societies, over time and according to circumstances? Asia is a region with a kaleidoscopic panorama of racial, languages, religions, cultures, history and political systems. In the early 1990s, the concept of Asian values was created by the elites to advocate stability and enforce social cohesion in a heterogeneous society, and it later becomes internationalized as a fundamental core by the leading exponent of the concept.

CONTINUED

Yes, and do you deny that it can be yanked away at any time by the Central Committee?

YanShen wrote:

Yes, and do you deny that it can be yanked away at any time by the Central Committee?

Apparently since the hand over, every major organization has observed that civil liberties are fairly well protected in China. My guess is that the Chinese are too pragmatic to ever interfere in Hong Kong in the manner that you're suggesting.

Nice dodge. If people in Hong Kong ever demand real democracy, what precisely do you think will happen?

The Hong Kong 1 July march (Chinese: 七一遊行) is an annual protest rally originally led by the Civil Human Rights Front since the 1997 handover on the HKSAR establishment day. However, it was not until 2003 that the march drew large public attention by opposing the legislation of Basic Law Article 23. The 2003 protest, with 500,000 marchers, was the largest protest ever seen in Hong Kong since the 1997 handover.[1] Prior to this, only the 21 May 1989 pro-democracy protest drew more people with 1.5 million marchers in Hong Kong sympathizing with the participants of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.[2] The introduction of Article 23 legislation was temporarily shelved because of the protest. Since then, the 1 July marches have been held every year as a channel to demand for democracy, universal suffrage, rights of minorities, protection of freedom of speech and a variety of other political concerns.

YanShen wrote:

Nice dodge. If people in Hong Kong ever demand real democracy, what precisely do you think will happen?

They've been demanding democracy every year on July 1st. See here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_1_July_marches

The Hong Kong 1 July march (Chinese: 七一遊行) is an annual protest rally originally led by the Civil Human Rights Front since the 1997 handover on the HKSAR establishment day. However, it was not until 2003 that the march drew large public attention by opposing the legislation of Basic Law Article 23. The 2003 protest, with 500,000 marchers, was the largest protest ever seen in Hong Kong since the 1997 handover.[1] Prior to this, only the 21 May 1989 pro-democracy protest drew more people with 1.5 million marchers in Hong Kong sympathizing with the participants of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.[2] The introduction of Article 23 legislation was temporarily shelved because of the protest. Since then, the 1 July marches have been held every year as a channel to demand for democracy, universal suffrage, rights of minorities, protection of freedom of speech and a variety of other political concerns.

These are not "demanding" democracy. These are peaceful, useless protests, kept in defined geographical areas. They are sham protests that the Central Committee can use to convince the gullible that there are actual human rights in Hong Kong and also, as a safe outlet for any unrest, without actually caring about anything the protesters want.

YanShen wrote:
The more salient point is this. China is a direct refutation of many liberal pet theories. One such pet theory, for instance, is that poverty leads to low educational achievement. However, the city of Shanghai, with a per capita GDP of only roughly $11,000 dominated the PISA rankings last December.

children raised in low-income families score lower than children
from more affluent families do on assessments of health, cognitive development,
school achievement, and emotional well-being.

Moving to low-poverty neighborhoods had positive effects on 11-18-year-old boys' achievement scores compared with those of their peers in high-poverty neighborhoods. These male adolescents' scores were comparable to females' scores, whereas male adolescents in high-poverty neighborhoods scored 10 points lower than female peers.

School drop out rates are significantly higher for teens residing in poorer communities. In 2007, the dropout rate of students living in low-income families was about 10 times greater than the rate of their peers from high-income families (8.8% vs. 0.9%).

Stationary state equilibria are found to exist in which children of poorer families are caught in a poverty trap because of an inability to finance their education. The role of redistributive policy is studied in this context.

259-page Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development report on the latest Pisa results notes that throughout its history, China has been organized around competitive examinations. “Schools work their students long hours every day, and the work weeks extend into the weekends,” it said.

Chinese students spend less time than American students on athletics, music and other activities not geared toward success on exams in core subjects. Also, in recent years, teaching has rapidly climbed up the ladder of preferred occupations in China, and salaries have risen. In Shanghai, the authorities have undertaken important curricular reforms, and educators have been given more freedom to experiment.

Neither of them does what the United States is now promoting: They do not hand students over to privately managed schools; they do not accept teachers who do not intend to make teaching their profession; they do not have principals who are non-educators; they do not have superintendents who are non-educators; they do not "turn around" schools by closing them or privatizing them; they do not "improve" schools by firing the principal or the teachers. They respect their teachers. They focus relentlessly on improving teaching and learning, as it is defined in their culture and society.

YanShen wrote:You must be joking right? Asian people live in Asian countries, last I checked. And his post is a criticism of Asian values.

Ihavenofingerprints wrote:The article he quoted seemed to be talking about the governments, and i honestly don't know anything about asian politics. If 914 comes back and say "yes, i meant to say all asians are inferior to white people", yes i will be against his new idea. But as i say it has nothing to do with this thread so lets move that discussion along somewhere else.

quixotecoyote wrote:

YanShen wrote:You must be joking right? Asian people live in Asian countries, last I checked. And his post is a criticism of Asian values.

Yes. People live in countries.

However, people are not countries.

And the post is a criticism of the values displayed by Asian countries (extending a bit into societies) rather than values as an inherent part of Asian individuals.

Which was more moral during WWII, GB or Japan? It's hard to argue GB given any definition of morality that frowns on the kinds of atrocities committed in China. We can obviously discuss that without racially impugning Japanese persons.

Middle Eastern countries are generally morally inferior to European countries in any system of morals that values personal liberties and the equality of women. That's factual. It's also not saying anything about Arabs (or Persians or whomever) on a racial level.

YanShen wrote:

Well at least he gave you two a thread to move your pointless discussion. Please talk about it there now.

Aren't you an anti-racist Ihavenofingerprints? I can't believe you're not outraged by 914 stating flat out that Asians are morally inferior to white people. This is amazing.

And the post is a criticism of the values displayed by Asian countries (extending a bit into societies) rather than values as an inherent part of Asian individuals.

YanShen wrote:
Not really. Asian values refer to the values of Asian people. East Asians tend to be more authoritarian by nature, which is why their governments also tend to be more authoritarian, even in places like Taiwan or Japan or South Korea. What 914 is saying is that Asian people have morally inferior values.

YanShen wrote:

And the post is a criticism of the values displayed by Asian countries (extending a bit into societies) rather than values as an inherent part of Asian individuals.

Not really. Asian values refer to the values of Asian people. East Asians tend to be more authoritarian by nature, which is why their governments also tend to be more authoritarian, even in places like Taiwan or Japan or South Korea. What 914 is saying is that Asian people have morally inferior values.

Authoritarian people actually do have morally inferior values, no matter where they are from.

YanShen wrote:Basically his post criticizes Asian values. The way that Asian governments operate is in part determined by the system of values of the people themselves. Because East Asians generally tend to be more authoritarian in nature, this is also reflected in the way that their governments are run, even in places like Japan, Taiwan, South Korea. What 914 is saying is that Asian people are morally inferior to white people and because they have inferior morals, they choose to run their governments in an inferior manner. This is white supremacy at its worst.

YanShen wrote:

Authoritarian people actually do have morally inferior values, no matter where they are from.

East Asians tend to be more authoritarian than Europeans. Hence, you're basically saying that Asians are morally inferior to whites. I haven't misrepresented you at all.

YanShen wrote:

Authoritarian people actually do have morally inferior values, no matter where they are from.

East Asians tend to be more authoritarian than Europeans. Hence, you're basically saying that Asians are morally inferior to whites. I haven't misrepresented you at all.