Comments by "Alan Friesen" (@alanfriesen9837) on "Cyrus Janssen" channel.

@americanpatriot126 Considering he's in Vancouver right now I think he's more likely to get arrested if he angers the United States.
25
@americanpatriot126 Slow down, you're going to choke on that koolaid.
5
Since we're talking about books, I just finished Klaus Mühlhahn's book "Making China Modern: From the Great Qing to Xi Jinpeng" which I had been told was the most authoritative book on modern China since Jonathon Spence's "The Search for Modern China". It had a lot of good information in it, but still it's portrayal of China followed the tired narrative that while Chinese progress to this point has been impressive, if they don't move closer to liberal democracy than what they have is unsustainable. There's a part of my that just wonders how much do these China experts have to see before they start to believe what's in front of their eyes. The best book that I have seen written on China (and I have to admit that I'm monolingual so I can't read what the Chinese themselves are writing) is Henry Kissinger's "On China". Whether you love or hate Kissinger, and I'm well aware of his controversial past, the man understands China like few Westerners do.
2
I think jealousy is a very small part of the equation. It has more to do with ideology and privelege. The ideology is political liberalism vs. authoritarianism. Western media outlets believe that authoritarianism is fundamentally unstable and that the ultimate state of society is a liberal democracy. Prior to 1989 westerners in general and western media outlets in particular believed that China was moving towards a liberal democracy. The events at Tiananmen Square completely upended that assumption. Western sensibility, exemplified by its media, was disappointed to the point of devastation. In part this was because of the human tragedy of that event, but beyond that it was because an authoritarian government broke their philosophy, and every success China has is a refutation of that ideology. The other thing that discolors the western press descriptions of China is the fact that China doesn't view the concept of freedom of the press as the kind of inalienable right that western journalists view it as. China controls its messages and it expects resident journalists to follow rules and submit to censorship when the government deems it in the countries interest. Journalists in China are not allowed to run around commenting on anything they want to. Western journalists feel like this environment is unacceptable, largely because they see themselves as superhero champions of the people, able to bring governments down when they get too abusive. This isn't just a journalist thing, it's an editor thing and an industry thing. Journalism attracts people who worship journalism and who want to be superheroes. The industry also rewards journalists who attack their perceived enemies—at the top of the list are governments that don't give journalists free reign to say whatever the hell they want. Of those governments, the Chinese is probably the strongest and the most responsible. Many authoritarian societies deserve everything the western press throws at them. The fact that China is doing right by its people doesn't come into the equation; it's still considered an enemy institution.
1
I applaud Mr. Yeo's attempt to come up with a workable solution, but I don't think that the Chinese people would permit the Chinese government to except such a solution, especially if it's described as a permanent solution. I'm convinced that if Taiwan doesn't negotiate itself into a peaceful "One China" reunification, it's going to find itself forcibly integrated with terms being dictated to them. What I would like to see, but almost certainly won't, is the legalization in China of the Chinese People's Party (Guomindang) in the Special Economic Zones, as well as Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, with the party headquarters being housed in Taipei (I'd also like to see the CPC return their headquarters back to Yenan). People in the SEZs could choose either a candidate from the CPC or from the KMT to represent them in the National People's Congress in Beijing. I'd also suggest that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress include within their ranks both the Chairman of the CPC and the Chairman of the KMT. This would be referred to, of course, as the Third United Front, and it would be imperative that the two parties remained united in the service of the Chinese People going forward where current standards of solidarity regarding policy within the Standing Committee are maintained and expressing disunity remain grounds for dismissal even from party chairmanship. I'd suggest that outside of Taiwan and Hong Kong, that campaigning be tightly restricted to avoid the kind of electoral circus that we see in so much of the world, and that within these two regions campaign standards be determined by the local governments. I'd like to think that this Third United Front could unify China in such a way that minimizes catastrophe and allows for all sides to feel comfortable within the one country. There are, of course, serious problems with this suggestion. The first problem is that I'm an American and there is no reason anyone in China has any reason to listen to me. The second is that the CPC is not just a political party. The CPC is the foundation for the People's Republic of China in the same way that the Constitution is the foundation of the United States. The CPC is the institution that the Chinese people trust when it comes to government and asking it to share authority with another party is a degradation of that foundation. Because of the KMT's history, it would be the least degrading and most acceptable party possible. After all, the KMT and CPC were united against the Japanese invasion in WWII, and there are KMT figures who are venerated in communist China, particularly Sun Yatsen. President Xi has been strengthening the CPC's role in the fabric of the PRC and I suspect he would be a strong critic of any approach resembling this one. Nonetheless, I think it would be the best option, but like I said before, "Ain't nobody gonna listen to me!" Let's hope though for an eventually peaceful reunification either way.
1
A patriotic education, whether in the United States or China, is brainwashing, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's okay to be taught about the awesomeness of your country, so long as the teaching doesn't disparage other countries who may have a different point of view.
1