To Serve People: Chinese Media Is A Jealous, Insecure, Peevish Teenage Girl

A weekly column in which Chinese media is taken to the stocks.

By TAR Nation



[Ed's note: TAR originally sent that in 100-point Rockwell Extra Bold font, which, sadly, we cannot replicate in this space, nor can we make it flash. Consider fuchsia a compromise.]

Space is awesome. Everything that happens in space is cooler than Earth. When I was in high school, I met an astronaut. I asked him, “How do you poop?” and I was genuinely interested in the answer. That does not apply to ANY other job.

So, the whole Shenzhou-9 thing was pretty cool, despite all the hype and patriotic commie back-slapping. It sounds silly, but it is actually inspiring.

My head was full of spaceships and Elijah Baley and Doctor Who and Cylons and R. Daneel Olivaw and Martian Chronicles (rest his sweet soul) and Hari Seldon and androids dreamin’ of sheep and Daleks and Rod Serling and, basically, shameless sci-fi namedropping that makes girls stop talking to you.

But the feel-good moment couldn’t last.

Global Times: Lunar paranoia haunts US establishment

By “US establishment,” GT means “guy at Foreign Policy.”

FP is responsible for such articles as “China’s Game of Thrones” and “The Old Grey Lady in Red.” Continuing with the FP playbook of thinking up a cool headline and then writing an article underneath it, the piece that caused all the kerfuffle is called “Red Moon Rising.”

It was a tongue-in-cheek examination of China’s rising (and unfortunate) international influence and how its station as a revisionist power affects future space ambitions.

We’re all familiar with China’s foreign policy when it comes to matters of territorial sovereignty. It’s basically, “A Chinese person took a dump here in the Zhou Dynasty, so it’s mine, mine, MINE!”

The Chinese editorial response is written by Han Zhu at the Shanghai Equinox Institute, the chairman of which is this intolerable cuntybollocks, which I can only assume means he tries to balance eggs on a kitchen table all day.

I don’t even know why I bother quoting Han, but here we go.

People in some countries, while approving China’s rapid progress in space technology, feel it a shame that their own role in space has largely slowed down.

Gee, I wonder who he means.

The article, while strongly questioning China’s objectives in lunar exploration, demonizes China’s plans, and calls for the US government to halt the Chinese ambition.

Question, yes. Demonize, no. Halt, no.

This ludicrous, aggressive perspective discloses the distorted mentality of a few Americans facing the rapid rise of China. They actually see the moon, where the US put a man four decades ago, as US territory where other countries can’t venture. This is a minority view, but a disturbing one.

No, they’re just worried that China will set the standards for driving and parking in space, and, well, we just can’t have that. I’ve got a pending bet that Shenzhou-9 will be double-parked before the end of the week.

Exploring the moon and outer space has been humanity’s dream for millennia, and remains a common goal for many countries today. The US should be happy about other countries’ space exploration. It should lay out more plans for joint exploration, rather than attempting to prevent other countries’ space development plans.

Wait. What? Hold the fuck on, right there. When did the US or anyone else ever try to “prevent” China from going into space? How did we get from an FP article to what is basically grounds for war? Every country within a thousand miles of the South China Sea can’t wait to see all of China shot into space.

And joint exploration? The US has done the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, Shuttle Mir missions and the Bad-Ass Super International Motherfucking Space Station.

China has done… nothing… with anyone… ever. Maybe that’s why the Chinese newspapers are always so grumpy. No one wants to play with them.

And, also, what kind of invitation do you call that? No, piss off. You can build your own little sandbox on the moon. The rest of us are going to Venus, because it’s the hottest name of any planet, to build a pillow fort and make Uranus jokes.

And you can’t come. Pttttttb!

Which leads us neatly into: China may be lonely, but not isolated

This is a Hu Xijin masterpiece. As we’ve discussed before, Hu Xijin’s greatest flaw is that he hasn’t been brutally murdered.

This one is brilliant. He actually sounds like a teenage girl who wasn’t invited to a party.

For example:

The exercise is nothing but a big party held by the US, which is in a melancholy state of mind due to difficult realities.

Translation: I don’t want to go to their stupid party. I hope they all get fat and ugly.

Those who have some knowledge of the military know that the more countries join such an exercise, the less military significance it has.

Translation: I only go to exclusive parties.

Their tolerance of the US more or less comes as a result of the worship or fear of the US’ military capabilities.

Translation: Nobody likes her anyway. They’re only going because there is a chocolate fountain.

China is likely to maintain its rapid development and help form a new international sphere, which intersects with that promoted by the US.

Translation: When I get more popular, I’m going to tell all of those people to stop talking to her.

The editorial concerns RIMPAC. Despite sounding like a disgusting but oddly appealing sexual act, it is just boring naval maneuvers. In it, Hu saber-rattles with the 21 other nations involved.

China is both lonely and isolated — politically, sociologically, intellectually isolated and so very alone. Hu’s editorial tries to make you think otherwise, all the while giving handjobs to stoners underneath the bleachers for attention.

We’ll finish with white people: Murder shows dangers of ethnic scapegoating in hard times

If you haven’t been paying attention lately (like, to the past 60 years or so), the Chinese propaganda rags have been lecturing the rest of the world on ethnic and racial morality mainly because there is no word in Mandarin for irony. Since the apology for the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 last week, the Chinese party-line papers (all of ‘em) have been going nuts, but criticism has mostly been directed at Americans. Now it’s… white groups?

It is important for the white groups to gradually accept competition from the global market. The US played a leading role in the global market. But the white groups need to adjust their psychology to a more diversified global market.

White groups. I have no idea what that means. Presumably, there is some sort of club or meeting full of just white people. The only things that come to mind are the Klan and Nickleback concerts. Perhaps it’s both. I mean, the article mentions white groups. It has been suggested to me that the intention is to paint Irish, Italian, German, Russian and everyone else ethnically northeast of the Caucus Mountains with the same whiter-than-white whitey McWhiterson brush (a type of brush made from crackers).

I realize it’s always tricky to wade into waters of race without offending anyone, but I shall endeavor to try.

Global Times’s implication is that white folk ALL have special clubs in America, looking for excuses to punch minorities in the face whenever they are skint.

The problem with this line of thinking is that it basically justifies racism. If all people of a certain race are capable of thinking exactly the same thing, then racism would be justified.

Let’s look at this through the lens of a false postulate:

Postulate: All Latinos like Sarah Palin.

Postulate: People who like Sarah Palin need a slap.

Conclusion: Slap a Latino.

The moral of the story: Don’t make vague generalizations about people based on their race, even white people, cause that makes you a dick. (I know, I know. They like Coldplay, but be cool. They’re a temperamental bunch.)

As far as GT goes, this is pretty par for the course: US bashing, elementary logical fallacies, speaking for entire ethnic groups and countries without the slightest hint of research and, of course, passive aggressive threats of globalization imperatives.

However, there’s a wrinkle to this latest piece: Global Times places the blame on Curtis Chin. Take a look:

 <— byline


Chin is the director of Vincent Who?, a documentary I highly recommend. He also co-founded the Asian American Writers Workshop and Asian Pacific Americans for Progress as well as served on President Barack Obama’s Asian American Leadership Council. He can also proudly call himself part of the 18,000 couples who got hitched before the tit-a-ma-boobery of Prop 8.

I just don’t picture this giant of human and civil rights saying:

Perhaps it is time for the white groups to put aside their elitist poses and accept these changes.

That doesn’t sound like a Curtis Chin. That sounds like a Hu Xijin.

Chin is a member of the Writer’s Guild, and they would almost certainly kick you out for using the phrase “white groups” six times in a 500-word article.

Nevertheless, I could be wrong. This article was compiled “based on an interview with Curtis Chin.” God knows what those poor editorial writers for the Global Times actually hear in their head in an interview.

It… does things to you. When I was at GT, I made a footlong rubber-band noose. I called it Hang Williams Jr. (AKA Noosephus).

So, Curt, I look forward to your next film. But please, don’t talk to GT’s editorial staff. It’s like giving a baby a Kalashnikov. Sure, it’s cute, but then you realize that every baby is a potential war criminal.

|To Serve People Archives|

    2 Responses to “To Serve People: Chinese Media Is A Jealous, Insecure, Peevish Teenage Girl”

    1. eh?

      Huh? The guy who made “Vincent Who?” wrote that? I think you’re right. Something fishy going on there. Probably just a mistranslation. Still. “White groups”. Funny as hell.

    2. reiner

      –”Jealous, Insecure, Peevish Teenage Girl”?
      I dont why these words always reminds me of the nowadays down down helpless and green-eyes monsters West, lol!


    Leave a Reply

    • (will not be published)

    XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    − five = 4