Some of my comments were perhaps too personal and blowhard. I was more venting against Chinese nationalism in general and I was wrong to make some of the more personal comments against Seahorse Liu…

Particularly as some of my personal comments were inaccurate. Please accept my sincere apology for those statements- I shouldn’t have made some of those comments so rashly and crudely

I do however stand by the main points of my post and I still think Chan is a hypocrite and CPC apologist. Perhaps im responding emotionally because whilst im NOT anti-China, I find the CPC hard to stomach.

I do hope my post is not removed though because they are my sincere sentiments. Again I apologise for the more personal comments. .

Nothing in this article changes my mind.

Some points id like to make-

1) Yes its true that in the past China suffered significant humiliation and suffering from outside forces. As a westerner, I fully acknowledge that. But past wrongs do not justify Chinese arrogance today and frankly China does strike me as an extremely arrogant nation. Not individual Chinese who are often genuinely modest, decent people- but as a nation, its a nation utterly unwilling to admit the bulk of its problems. This is arrogance.

2) Chan is a hypocrite. He argues Hong Kongers should be controlled and their right to freedom of expression curtailed. And yet he obviously feels he has a right to be a cheerleader for the CPC.

3) He is not being criticised for criticising the US- it is true even many Americans criticise the US. Rather he is being critisised for his hypocrisy in attacking a country which largely helped expand his fame and fortune whilst utterly ignoring problems in China. As a CPC cheerleader will will obviously never admit China’s many moral wrongs.

4) Playing the ‘China being bullied’ card is pathetic. China today is a powerful and dominant nation, a rising superpower- hardly a victim of ‘bullying’ Arguably, it is China that bullies smaller Asian neighbours like the Philippines and Vietnam.

5) As the writer of this article will know full well, it is incredibly difficult to openly criticise the CPC in the Chinese Mainland without facing serious risk. The ONLY way mainland Chinese can have open views is online.

6) Sovereignty does not give any government the right to do anything it wants to its own people which is essentially what the writer of this article is arguing. Western countries are frequently criticised so what makes China so special? Why should China be above criticism? If China wants to be a member of the international community then it has to accept the scrutiny that any nation is subjected to. Deng Xiaoping probably knew this when he opened China up in 1978.

7) It never ceases to amase me that Chinese neo-nationalists like the writer of this article take advantage of freedom of expression in the west only to make excuses for a one party regime back in Beijing that responds to dissent with an iron fist.

8) As a westerner I retain genuine respect for many aspects of China. I am not fundamentally anti-Chinese. But I am fed up with blowhard ‘blame western media’ Chinese nationalism. Nationalism that constantly forces itself onto other countries through the pro-CPC agenda of many overseas Chinese. Nationalism that constantly denies China’s problems whilst claiming its a result of ‘western misunderstandings’ and nationalism that arrogantly believes China is the only country on earth above criticism.

9) Furthermore, despite the denials, China is actually a very xenophobic and racist society. Yang Rui’s disgusting rant against foreigners- demonising all because of the actions of some, is typical of the ugliness of Chinese neo nationalism. The west proves itself a far more tolerant society because a similar rant from a western news anchor would be met by calls for resignation.

10) Imagine if a western commentator went to China and criticised the CPC in the Mainland. Oh wait… thats forbidden. Enjoy your time in imperialist Canada, Liu Seahorse!

But to me the negative thing about Jacke Chan is his total makeover from a worldly actor to a willing propaganda tool.

You would assume a HK born person who had spent time in the west would have a little more intellectual integrity.

But in recent years he has openly criticized not only the United States, but also he’s criticized the movies he has done there. That makes little sense because the US gave him much love and the US market is what made him a global star.

Add to that his comments about Chinese people not being smart enough to handle freedom or democracy, his always pro CPC stance on every issue, his over the top patriotic red singing, what you end up with is a fake person who has decided sucking up to the government is good for his career.

It makes me respect Chan a lot less.

Was your ‘real change’ sarcastic? I mean, let’s face it, once something becomes hot on Weibo and has the potency to change things, censors will jump on it like Indians on a girl.

However I do think that Weibo has a lot of potential in this process. More so than Twitter, but only because of the particular situation in both worlds. To link this to the Jackie Chan story, I think one huge advantage of having China cut off from Twitter is that the debate can be held with relatively closed doors. Given the number of trolls and frustrated people on Twitter that may actually help speed up the process. It’s a bit of a double-edged sword though.

Jackie Chan is basically a human panda, he is seen as something that represents China to the world. But if he wanted a better movie role he could just make one up, he pretty much produced and acted in the whole Police Story series. I think he just talks a little too much and have less forethought.

Every foreigner who criticizes China then is guilty of the equivalent of this. America is knee deep in crises of it’s own, but I’m too daft?

I guess I have more confidence in mainstream media also. There’s a lot of money to be made in outing a corrupt politician. In China, there’s only laogai and a bowl of cold rice for doing that, unless the politician’s particular faction is on the shitlist.

He’s essentially feeding the Mainland Press Pro-PRC platitudes so he can get the good movie roles. Not to be trite, I know he’s already got lots of money, but he needs to repair his image after some 素质 comments about Mainlanders not deserving the vote, etc.

Chinese corruption vs. US corruption? Honestly, I don’t see much of a difference (perhaps this is a deeper point, or the same point… I’m not sure): in China you have no vote, in the US you have the choice between two parties, both of which are being bullied/bribed by same legal entities (corporations, lobbyists, special interest groups).

So in China you get no choice, and in the US you get a fake choice.

In China you have no journalistic integrity (you’ll get shut down if you criticize the govt), and in the US, you have more journalistic integrity (to a point, then you get thrown off the air for pissing off advertisers).

One point of MAJOR distinction between the two is the Internet. In China, things like Weibo have caused real change (eg. naked Fugly+小姐 action), and in the West Twitter/Blogging has obviously been a force to hold public people/mainstream media/regulators accountable. Of course, every major SNS in China is being ‘dusted’ by the Government, even me too Search Engine, Baidu.

So in conclusion… “corruption is everywhere, but at least the US has Twitter”? Meh.

Good piece that has gotten a lot of people talking. And to be honest with you, I just wanted to talk to somebody that has to go to that colorful shoebox in the sky that they call OCAD. Are there holes punched in the lid to allow you students to breathe?

I agree pretty with everything that with ever that happened to China in the past decade or two is of course China is going to attract attention, and of course this is a thing that needs to happen and should happen, but there is a thought in China to not say anything to foreigners. People in Jackie Chan’s generation (eg my parents who grew up in the Cold War) quite honestly grew up believing people were simply out to get them. That it is better to appeal to devils you know (the CPC) than the ones you don’t.

But, ultimately no matter how much time we argue back and forth and take sides, what really needs to happen is Chinese people to do something about it. Which is why I do sympathize a little with the idea Chinese problems are ideas ultimately meant to be solved by the Chinese no matter how slow it seems to us. All we can really do is poke and prod.

Ah, starry eyed idealists from overseas, sometimes I wonder if they ever wandered outside of the CBDs of Shanghai and Beijing. I’m quite fond of China myself, but I like to think I’m realistic. I share any grandeur illusion that the next century is going to belong to the Chinese.

Also: no love for me, Seahorse? You’ve replied to everyone else here.

It is easy to point fingers and scream at the nearest target. America is simply an easy target, large controversial international influence, blame cow for the western world, and questionable war practices. Alternatively China is also a great place to point a finger at, likewise large controversial international influence, closest thing to a USSR-like adversary left, questionable governance practices… Hence if you follow American politics it’s a lot of “and Chinese communists are stealing our industries” when it comes to foreign policy. It’s easy to talk amongst yourselves about problems, but when someone else points things out out defensive people like to say “at least we are not so and so, they have such and such.”

But it’s also ridiculous that we really care what a celebrity says so much to go as far as calling a one line gaffe it anti-American? This is after as you said, typical Wu Mao nonsense, the face people are reporting on it is just turning back again and saying “well you are such and such too!”

The point is, Chan is engaged in typical Wu Mao nonsense in ignorning problems at home and pointing fingers at others.

Too bad you’re too daft to see that and stepping right into it.

Screw Chan and screw anyone who thinks his Wu Mao ways are acceptable.