中國的社會良知
China's Social Conscience
I've always been curious about China.
When we learned of China
in elementary school, it was always in terms of their ancient
history, achievements, geography or economic exports. (The classic
encyclopedic cut and paste, before computers.) My teachers may have
also brought up religion or politics, wars or social life, but never
more than a skimming over: "none, communist, plentiful or
difficult."
My parents were no help
to me in truly understanding China, although they would have had
opportunity to influence my opinion of it. I can not recall my father
ever mentioning China, except in reference to population. My mother
had a strong dislike for China's political and social movements and
had personal memories of "Chairmen Mao in the news." My
father was a card carrying New Democrat raised in Vancouver, British
Columbia. My mother was an ex-Republican raised
in Freeport,
Illinois.
Then in 1989 there was
the Tiananmen Square Protest in Bejing. I was aware that there was
some sort of protests taking place, and of course, like everyone else
I saw the iconic photo of the lone student standing in front of a
line of tanks. However, to be perfectly honest, I had
other things on my mind at seventeen. These memories of my past
represent the totality of my Chinese experience, which is to say,
even to this day, I haven't any real understanding of China at all.
Of course, I'm not
seventeen anymore. I'm over forty now and a much more educated and
wise person, or at least, this is the hope. Yet, I still know nothing
substantial about modern China. Those of you who know me or have read
me before must be aware that when I say "know" I mean a
true knowing, via experiences beyond that of being told, as what we
are told in the west is so often skewed. (Isn't it ironic that such
concerns are valid in spite of having "China" as the
subject matter?) For instance, in the west, China is "bad"
because it is communist and, perhaps more specifically, not
democratic. (I over-generalize, because it's true.) However, despite
being a fan of democracy, I don't believe that any true democracy
exists on our planet. There are only degrees of democracy to be
found, some nations rate higher on this scale than others. Canada,
for instance, would rate fairly high in comparison to China on any
democratic scale, but I'm not sure that really matters at all.
The problem (already?)
is one of definitions. This is due to a nearly complete inability for
modern humans to truly understand what it is they even are
discussing, due to "the Semantic Deception of Dialectical
Theses" and "Hyper-Manipulation." (Anyone wishing to
delve into the "Rampant Ineptitude of Modernity" will find
everything they need on this website, or in my book, "Anti-Social
Engineering the Hyper-Manipulated Self." But really what all
this philosophical gobbledly gook means is: "Anything can be
broken down and rendered meaningless in a reality you create. Now
realize that people have known this for over one hundred years and
have been manipulating you.")
So why does my curiosity
about China continue to grow? Indeed, what is the point of this
essay? It's simple, China is pro-social conscience. This may seem
contradictory, considering what many consider to be a near infinite
list of Chinese human rights abuses. A "social conscience"
is "a
personal consideration of one’s role and responsibility in
society." It is like an understanding of your duties and
obligations to citizenry; or "what you can do for your country
and its people."
China
is working toward something. The Chinese people do so consciously and
cooperatively. (What it is they work toward is of no consequence, but
just to be thorough, they work toward becoming as wealthy and
powerful as America.) The point here is that they aren't there yet,
it's been a long road, yet they stick to their path and together, the
steps they take lead in the right direction: toward peace,
prosperity, happiness for each other. The same old groovy things that
we all want, to leave the world better off than when we got here.
(Obviously, a topic for another essay.)
So
contrast that with what (ironically, again) we in the western world
work toward: peace, prosperity and happiness for ourselves. We are
economically conscious. We are selfish, greedy and spoiled. Of
course, there are selfish and greedy Chinese people, (call them the
people in power.) And this is not to say that there are not problems
in China that need to be addressed. It's just that the bulk of the
people in China are what we would consider impoverished and yet
they still carry the social contract. In
much the same way, America used to be full of Americans who carried
in their hearts and minds a social contract. But a social contract is
difficult to adhere to in the face of blunt force success. Why would
anyone wish to remain altruistic when one can be selfish and get
rich? These prizes are what await China in it's successes, if they
are not careful. Perhaps it doesn't matter if you advocate democracy
or communism when it comes to capitalism.
Other
countries, call them Muslim, also purport to live up to a contract,
but theirs is religious. This is the most ridiculous and damaging
social contract or consciousness to attempt carrying throughout your
society. This is not a comment on any particular religion, but rather
the transformation of that religion into civic duty. If you think
China has issues with human rights abuses and America has issues with
greed, this is nothing compared to the concept of beheading a man
because he drew a caricature of a fictional entity. Religion is
window dressing in America's social contract, it's irrelevant in
China's. Kudos China. Arguments that morality stems from religion and
China has "morality issues" are semantically flawed:
Religion comes from having morals, not the other way around. (This is
yet another concern for yet another fruitless essay.) Look
at it this way: America lets it citizens do and say anything they
want, (almost,) and they force their ideologies on the rest of the
world. China may not let it's citizens do and say anything they want,
but they leave the rest of the world alone. (Which is worse?) A
Muslim's contract is to the worst of both worlds.
The next President of
China, Xi Jinping, grew up in a cave as a peasant on a farm during
Mao's cultural revolution, despite being from a wealthier family.
(These were the sorts of things that we're forced on the Chinese
people during the time. These were the concerns my mother warned me
about. And yes, tens of millions of people died during the
revolution. Mao's plan was flawed, despite the level of correctness
in his intentions. But I still fail to see how, at least for Jinping,
this could be anything but educational and socially grounding.)
Jinping then returned to his city life and went to University, having
lived on both side of the tracks, as it were. Now he's to be given
ten years to convince the Chinese people that life is getting better
for them rather than worse. Although China has been booming
economically lately and even concerns about rights are voiced less
and with greater infrequency, with the world going to shit at the
hands of the Americans, China's still going to have it's hands full.
I feel that China will continue its "hands off" approach
and I like that. Consider the following quote from Jinping, who's
most often described as "pragmatic:" "There are some
bored foreigners, with full stomachs, who have nothing better to do
than point fingers at us [China]. First, China doesn't export
revolution. Second, China doesn't export hunger and poverty. Third,
China doesn't come and cause you headaches. What more is there to be
said?" Indeed.
Don't concern yourself
too much about the fact that China is the last and greatest bastion
of Communism. The reasons to let this slide are as numerous as the
reasons you must let any other governmental concern slide: it's all a
slippery slope of ball and cup magic. Is Canada "almost
communist" because it's socialist? Is America democratic to
offer only two parties to choose from? Is Russia democratic when
Vladimir Putin has been in office since 1999? All of these countries
I mention as examples of either an absent or misguided understanding
of their own politics: either due to selfishness, greed, confusion
or ignorance. China is not an exception to these apparent rules of
the game: Greed exists because there are humans in positions of
power. As this is not communism, a real and true communism where all
things are equal amongst people, Communism is not any less real than
Democracy, where an informed citizenry make relevant decisions on
subjects that matter. It's all just a question of what we tell
ourselves. The Chinese people get up every day and exercise together,
(so I've read,) that in and of itself puts the rest of us to shame. I
hope for the sake of all humanity, China doesn't fall into the traps
of Western Culture, because really, that would put them to shame.
Communist corruption is
not really any different than Democratic corruption. The thousands of
Chinese officials who lived the good life by way of Uncle Sucker are
only differentiated from their western counterparts by the fact that
the communist says nothing and the capitalist lies. The problems of
our systems lead to greed and corruption the same as in any system
where there is a buck to be made, this human fault is universal. For
the communist, so conservative, believing the system to be right,
finding error or admitting mistakes is almost sin. These are the
problems of pride. Read THIS
How is this problem any different than say, "Government Sachs,"
or the Finance Minister who comes to office with a balanced budget
and seeks re-election with the promise of balancing the budget? How
is the Chinese politician's adherence to his "political
morality" any different than right wing Republicans? Corruption
is an accountability problem. Every government in the world has this
problem. If there was a way to make your politicians accountable,
they'd have to do the will of the people. That would mean a true
communism, a leveling off. This would be due to the scientific fact
that fairness has a way of coming through, eventually.
I happen to be of the
opinion that the military budget of the US alone could solve almost
every single problem the world faces, if used properly. But since
money is about to be returned to the imaginary realm from whence it
sprang forth, I'm counting on the intentions of a citizenry to spring
forth. When everyone stops getting paid, who's still gonna show up
for work? I'll bet on China.
