(Note to readers: Please beware gifs and copious sarcasm)

By TAR Nation

Global Times chose June 4 to publish two editorials about how the Internet and media need to be brutally censored. One editorial is by Shan Renping — the party’s stupidest editorial lapdog — and the other is from the rat-infested oozing pile of vomit and bile shat through the vagina of a dead yet zombified tapeworm screaming at the top of its intestines, Hu Xijin.

Let’s start with Hu: “Web regulation in public’s best interest” (I’m not linking it, linking it gives them hits).

On today of all days, as sites get shut down, as Weibos get deleted, as encrypted Wikipedia gets a going-over, “Hu who-should-not-be-named” thought this was a good time to remind everyone that unparalleled restriction of the Internet is right, good and will never, ever end. He begins with a tale in Germany.

In mid-May, the German Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe demanded Google clean up its auto-complete function, because it generates results that are offensive and defamatory. The new rule for Google Search is said to be a milestone that marks Germany’s first efforts to regulate its Internet services.

Yes, Hu’ll Stop the Rain, because Google’s lax predictive search abilities are exactly equal to the outright ban on Human Rights Watch, Facebook, Twitter, China Digital Times, The New York Times, Blogspot, Worpress.com, Amnesty International, Wikileaks, Reporters Without Borders, hundreds of VPN services, anything from Tibet not vomited directly from censors, even the god damned Norwegian Broadcasting Company when China doesn’t like who it gives awards to, et al.

Yes, this technological spider glitch choosing from recent/commonly searched…

…is the same as the indiscriminate censorship of international and individual communication and thought. Or, considering China’s desire to destroy Internet freedom, perhaps this is more apt:

Oh, but wait. He’s not done. Hu has more examples.

For example, Facebook has started to provide training for its website regulators to help identify and delete inappropriate remarks.

That’s part and parcel if you read their terms and conditions and is pretty standard for any site that wants to keep stalking, abuse and boobs off its site. It is not the same as… wait… hold the fuck on for a second… Did that motherfucker just use Facebook as an example… FACEBOOK?!?!?

Facebook, the Facebook which has been banned ever since China scapegoated unrest in Xinjiang to “foreign agitators”? The same Facebook that no one has been able to get on without a proxy since 2008? The same Facebook that is an App on my phone I can’t use? Is that what you mean, Hu? IS IT!?!?!?

Despite irony so thick it clogs chainsaws, Hu continues.

In Turkey, where chaos and turmoil are running rampant, the Turkish government criticized social media as the top threat.

This is true, the Turkish PM said, “Social media is the worst menace to society.” Yes, not cancer, or hemorrhoids, or hunger, or authoritarianism, or despots, or meteors, or drugs, or reality TV, or censorship, or terrorism, or when the sun expands and swallows the earth… it’s Instagram. While Turkey is indeed a democracy, press freedoms there leave a great deal to be desired, but GT jumps on it as a reason to not “do” democracy, as it does every time there is unrest in a democratic country: Syria, Thailand, US, ad infinitum.

Similar denouncements have also been heard from the British Parliament.

Weeellllll, sort of. PM David Cameron did, two years ago, mention something of a ban for the instigators of the riots in the UK. This went nowhere and further concreted him and his government as laughingstocks. But this…

…is completely different from what we have here in China, which is this:

A few other idiots in the UK made navel-gazing comments about the dangers of social media, but they — and I can’t stress this enough — would never, ever, ever dare. Those riots were over school fees. If they tried to ban social media, there wouldn’t be a fish-and-chips-eating son of a bitch left alive on the island.

Hu goes on to make the uniform excuses and defenses, all of which I have illustrated before in this column:

Blaming the evil “West”:

This deceptive voice has gained support from Western public opinion, which makes China’s regulation of the Internet encounter more resistance than in other countries.

It is actually part of democracy:

The Internet, to some extent, has been part of the process through which Chinese society seeks “democracy” and “diversity.”

From Admiral Akbar, it’s a trap!:

This virtual community has bred some political and moral traps.

Defense of the status quo and threats:

Internet regulation has to be carried out until those spreading adverse remarks fear the strength of the public interest.

And, of course, a condemnation of free speech in general:

People already understand that free speech can not go against social order.

So, that’s Hu Xijin’s warped thoughts on this solemn day, the day when hope for freedom of expression died in the Middle Kingdom.

What about Shan Renping? You may remember him from this photo, a 2,000-ton pile of burning cow manure:

It tickles me that this shows up on a Google Image search for him.

He’s much like his lord and master, Hu Xijin, but stupider. With Hu beating online freedom with a knobby stick, Shan moved toward the actual press with, “Media professionals should prioritize rational reflection,” in which he inadvertently lays out guidelines for how all journalists in China need to be the government’s bitch and not say things behind its back on Weibo. Normally, his editorials are conspiracy-theory-laced, Western-hemisphere-hating dribble. But in this one, he thinks he has the blessing of the Associated Press.

Media professionals are among the main Weibo users in China. They are unconstrained when it comes to posting news, even if it was not published by the media outlets they serve.

For the use of the word “unconstrained” there, Shan Renping, may you and a hundred generations of your ancestors rot in hell.

There’s a lot of information not published by the media outlets they “serve.” Largely because little bastards like you — on a weekly basis — tell them that they can’t publish what your dogged masters consider “good for society.” So, they turn to Weibo, where an unconfirmed post has more credibility than all of the state-run propaganda rags put together.

They often express their sharp views. These activities are all firmly opposed by AP’s guidelines.

I have been in media and journalism for as long as I can remember (I drink a lot). I have met reporters from every background and field. Not one of them ever expressed a “sharp” view to me. Spreading unconfirmed NEWS is frowned upon by AP (because they’re respected reporters), not opinions. On opinions, they will have to yield to the authority of the GT news desk (because you’re a useless garbage heap).

Then, he said this:

It is hard to identify whether AP is too strict or China’s media management is too loose.

Yes, that’s the international consensus, Renping: that China’s media management is too loose.

He continues:

A strengthening of discipline among media workers would be conducive to the establishment of order in social networks while maintaining the authority of traditional media.

Ahhhhhh, I get it. He thinks anyone cares what the “traditional media” of China thinks. They don’t. No one does. You are a joke. The only reason AP made its rules is because people take their reporters seriously. There is nothing — NOTHING — GT can do to hurt its own credibility. Next?

(On social media)…. problems, such as rumors, foul language and extreme views, are also prominent.

I’m going to start a political party called Obliterate Crossdresser Shan Renping’s Fucking Existence. How’s that? I hate you. I hate you the way racists hate other races. I hate you forever and for always, until fate puts you with me in the bowels of hell (my heaven) where I can rip your throat out with my very own teeth for an eternity. Extreme enough for ya?

Next?

However, it doesn’t mean that all media personalities with verified identities are free to express their views on social networks. Conflicting opinions that differ from the media they serve will aggravate rumors and extreme views.

You and the Global Times are the only ones aggravating my and everyone else’s extreme views. The morning was lovely. I slept well. The air was thick with rain ready to fall to the dry earth, the beautiful smell of petrichor wafting in from the southern air. Then, I read your editorial, and now I’m thinking of fisting you with a coffee mug on each finger.

This is not related to freedom of speech, but is instead aimed at maintaining the rules.

Die.

…clear and precise ground rules should be prioritized.

Die.

A process is needed for eliminating the “politicization” of social networks.

Die painfully.

So, there you have it, the un-remembered dead, soldiers and protestors alike. The big news story today is how China has managed to completely and utterly ignore, censor and ban a national tragedy for decades. Which, really, is what today is all about. I don’t care about dead people, to be honest. They make for lousy conversation. But today was the day when free press got really, really far away. For those of us who have now experienced quite a few June 4ths in China, it can seem that all hope of ever having a free and open media is lost.

Perhaps it is. Perhaps all of us should just go with prevailing economic trends and side with and bow to the authoritarian who so wants to look after us and keep us safe.

Neh, too many bastards need a firm talking to. So, I’m looking forward to June 4, 2014, when — maybe, just maybe — the nation will remember and the Chinese press will find its balls.

Friend and comrade Justin Mitchell recently had an article defending the folks who work at GT (regarding the SCMP piece, “Is it a sin to work for Global Times”), and with good reason. The greatest reporter I have ever personally met, I met at GT. A brave soul who was fired for something he tweeted. So, is it a sin to work for Global Times? Well, I don’t believe in sin or sinners, or the Nuremburg defense for that matter. But I do believe in shame. If you worked there, you might feel it. Not all the time, but sometimes. And if you have never felt it… well, you probably still work there. Why wouldn’t you? I would.

But, aside from shame, I also believe in revenge. Even the CCP gets tired of protecting monsters.

Tick tock, Hu. Tick tock.

|To Serve People Archives|

By TAR Nation

On Tuesday night, the Global Times published an article damning Elton John for dedicating his performance to Ai Weiwei and encouraging Chinese people to boo future similar performers off the stage. On the same day, GT published “‘Top thinkers’ list a reflection of US values,” a scathing indictment of Foreign Policy’s list, which features, among others, Ai Weiwei.

It seems that GT will do just about anything it can to insult, discredit and destroy Ai Weiwei.

But it was not always so.

THE LOVE AFFAIR

Once upon a time, Ai was a common feature in the Global Times English-language edition. Collaborator on the Bird’s Nest Stadium, world-renowned artist, troublemaker with just enough sense to stay inside the lines, Ai Weiwei.

There was once optimism at the ludicrously nationalistic propaganda rag, confidence that it wouldn’t just be another party-line tool. No one really knows what happened to make GT’s English-language site become an embarrassment to both China and the government for which it plays pitbull. The columns from He-Hu-Shall-Not-Be-Named got more hateful and violent. The toadying slowly rose to nausea-inducing levels. And anyone who had any idealism got fired, quit or paid enough not to mind.

But back in 2009, there was hope that GT could be relevant, and Ai, just bad-boy enough to make it into the papers, was a bread-and-butter play.

In November 2009, Ai was cited in a feature called “Rage inside the machine,” an article so-called for observations in his blog. In the same month, Ai was mentioned in “2009 in features,” noting a New York Times piece “about some of the more disquieting aspects of his life and work.” In September of that same year, Ai was lauded in “Ai Weiwei’s World Map,” a puff piece featuring his gallery opening in 798. Quote: “Commenting on the socio-political and economic climate of contemporary China, Ai uses metaphoric references, humor, pun and political irony to redefine and reconsider the meaning of traditions.”

GT also acknowledged, without foaming at the mouth, his earthquake work:

As an internationally recognized contemporary Chinese artist, Ai found himself under the spotlight again in December when he started an investigation into the student casualties in the Sichuan earthquake last May.

“Artist,” not dissident or traitor or Western stooge or liberal. “Artist.”

It wasn’t just the Global Times, either. No one really had an excuse to hunt the bearded media-savvy artiste. Xinhua was all aflutter over his being chosen by the Danish government to design a replacement for their “The Little Mermaid,” which was going to be at the Shanghai Expo in 2010, a story reported earlier in May 2009. Under the People’s Daily wide umbrella, The Market News (市场报) praised him in 2005. In Global People (环球人物) and in the overseas edition of People’s Daily, Ai got the celebrity treatment. And Economic Weekly (中国经济周刊) fawned over him in 2009 (see above CMP link for more info).

In the Global Times Forum, GT published Ai’s blog post, “Why Barack Obama should talk about human rights.” In December of the same year, Ai got himself a massive feature, “Making waves,” which celebrated and rejoiced in his kitschy grassroots investigation into the earthquake and artwork. Also, in 2009, GT published this picture:

That is Ai Weiwei’s 9,000 backpacks spelling out “She led a happy life in this world for seven years” in memory of Yang Xiaowan, who died in the Sichuan earthquake. The article was a call to arms for brilliant bloggers, opening with, “Reports of the death of blogging appear greatly exaggerated.”

2010 was not much different. Wen Tao, the greatest reporter you’ll never meet, published “Ai Weiwei takes on ministry” in March 2010. From “A bit of Beijing in Berlin” to “Artist share moving stories,” he was China’s premier artist and lovable eccentric. GT seemingly took his side on the demolition of Fake, and they even published Ai’s personal photos of a protest.

Here is a photo of Ai Weiwei actually IN the Global Times building on Guanghualu in Beijing having his photo taken with staff in early 2011, about three months before GT branded him a “tool of the West.”

The important thing to remember is that, at this time, not one editorial from Hu Xijin or Shan Renping said a word about Ai Weiwei. It just wasn’t in their wheelhouse.

Then he “touched the red line,” as Hu Xijin put it.

THE RED LINE

Everything changed on April 6, 2011, after Ai’s arrest for “tax evasion.” Global Times turned on him with a coordinated character assault. The following is an excerpt from “The law will not be twisted for mavericks” (Chinese edition translation, all praise be unto CMP).

Ai Weiwei, who has been called an “avant-garde artist,” was reportedly “led away” by Chinese police recently, and a number of Western governments and “human rights organizations” quickly stepped out to interfere, demanding that China immediately release Ai Weiwei. They also elevated this matter as a “worsening of human rights” in China, and called Ai Weiwei a “champion of human rights in China.”

Ai Weiwei is a “performance artist” who has been quite active in recent years, and he is often called an “avant-garde artist.” He is a maverick standing on his own. He goes against artistic tradition, and he loves “shocking others with words” (惊人之语) and “shocking others with actions” (惊人之举). He also enjoys moving at the “fringes of the law”, doing things “the legality or illegality of which” ordinary people can’t quite grasp.

As Ai Weiwei loves doing things his way, he often does things “others don’t dare to do.” Moreover, he is surrounded by people of similar ilk. He is probably quite clear himself that he is often not very far from the red line of Chinese law.

This is how fast the whole of China’s propaganda machine can turn on anyone, with vicious and injudicious use of quotation marks.

The Chinese newspapers have done this with every dissident to get a headline, asserting that they sold out their country for fame and glory in the West. They did it with Liu Xiaobo, Liao Yiwu, Chen Guangcheng, ad infinitum. So, in the end, it wasn’t Ai Weiwei that did wrong. It was his defenders, and his defenders came from artists and advocates in pretty much every country on earth with an Internet connection. This means one thing in China: the West.

But Ai Weiwei didn’t just fall from grace. He was pushed.

From that point forward, he was referred to as a dissident or a Western pawn, never again as an “award-winning Chinese artist.” His name became “sensitive,” support of him became harmonized and he was relegated to the scapegoat cabinet of Chinese media. These efforts were, and continue to be, spearheaded by the nationalistic shame that is Global Times. People’s Daily largely stays out of it, but when they do wade into those waters, they reprint from GT. Xinhua does the same. Due to Ai’s general charisma and the fact that he hasn’t really done anything wrong, the Chinese media (and GT in particular) had but one stick left to beat him with: “the West.” And, man, have they worn out that stick.

Here is a smattering of what happened when the worm turned:

“Ai Weiweis will be washed away by history,” November 16, 2011, by Shan Renping:

Artist Ai Weiwei told foreign media recently that some 30,000 people lent him in total 8.8 million yuan ($1.4 million) to pay the tax bill and fine… Is 30,000 a big number, compared to China’s population of 1.3 billion? Even weibo has more than 100 million users. [...]

Ai is a symbol of those dissidents that win full support from the West. Chinese people who have interest in politics all know him. But for those who don’t know him or cannot remember him, are not interested in his game of political confrontation.

The West has supported many dissidents in China. The Western media once regarded Wei Jingsheng, imprisoned in 1978 for 15 years, as “the father of Chinese democracy.” That “father” is now in some little corner of the US and journalists don’t even bother to report on him. [...]

We must say that without the support of the West, Ai is literally nothing. [...]

Their prospects are closely connected with China’s misfortune… Then let’s hope their luck is not so good. Their appearance could serve to keep a prosperous China vigilant.

“West’s support of Ai Weiwei abnormal,” April 16, 2011 (a year after Ai is initially arrested), by an unnamed editor:

Since early April, the arrest of Chinese artist Ai Weiwei has been used by some Western media as a stick with which to bash China’s human rights situation.

As a Chinese citizen, Ai undoubtedly enjoys favorable treatment from the West, which constitutes an intrusion of China’s legal system. The Western bias toward Ai results from his confrontational attitude to the government. [...]

The belief that there is political persecution in China is a fallacy.  Instead, the country is witnessing the unfolding of democracy. At the same time, that does not mean the people mentioned above can do whatever they want in the name of democracy, nor does the West have the right to set up a roadmap and timetable for China.

It is abnormal to hype up Ai’s case – the West seeks to refute China’s basic political system by paralyzing its legal system. The West will undoubtedly oppose any future verdict on Ai Weiwei, as it aims to put down Chinese values.

“Take note of grass-roots opposition to dissidents,” June 18, 2012, by Yu Jincui:

Ai Weiwei and the Dalai group have both been rejected by the mainstream of Chinese society but are portrayed in a noble light by the West. They have been granted high status by a few Western politicians and political forces. This high recognition abroad, however, is not acknowledged among the majority of Chinese. [...]

At the most, people are often puzzled as to why activists and separatists are given so much attention by the West. The Chinese public values more rational approaches to moving this huge country forward. But this simple feeling is often ignored by the West, thus putting itself at odds with Chinese mainstream society.

There are many more, including this week’s “Elton John’s outburst met with indifference” by the “man” himself, Hu Xijin. (Note: Five unsolicited responses have come forward to tell me that Elton’s “outburst” was met with a reaction, and that it was positive.)

Obviously, John’s [yes, he calls him John] unexpected action was disrespectful to the audience and the contract that he signed with the Chinese side. He forcibly added political content to the concert, which should have been nothing more than an entertaining performance. If they had known that this concert would be dedicated to Ai Weiwei, many in the audience would not have come to see this concert. [...]

Western society is seriously biased against China. When US magazine Foreign Policy compiled a list of 100 global thinkers from around the world, the first Chinese on that list was blind activist Chen Guangcheng, and the second was Ai Weiwei. Even to Chinese people who have sympathy for these two people, this list may seem ridiculous. [...]

The selection of Chen and Ai makes people wonder whether the word “thinker” in Chinese and English have different meanings. We can just say that some Westerners are increasingly unable to contain themselves over China’s rise. They cannot control China through normal means and they are more likely to rush their fences.

A LITTLE BIT OF REVENGE

It’s important to mention that Ai didn’t take all this lying down. In November 2011, he fought back by releasing the personal phone number of Hu Xijin, the editor-in-chief of the Global Times who pens GT’s editorials and is, as it happens, one of the worst living “human beings.” I have no particular love for Ai Weiwei — art is, let’s be honest, a bit poncey — but everyone is a huge fan of screwing with bullies and getting away with it.

Hu Xijin, a consummate professional, took the fight to his state-funded Communist Party propaganda rag for fair and balanced coverage. We have confirmation that he penned this himself:

So, the man who was detained, extra-judicially, for 81 days (along with his completely innocent staff) caused the propaganda monsters to “suffer” from prank phone calls.

Other gems in this piece include:

The staff of Global Times have no personal grudge against Ai. Global Times has published several commentaries concerning Ai’s case since April but has made no personal attacks against him.

He must have missed the “Ai is literally nothing” bit.

Besides, these comments were conducted against the background of Western media and foreign governments meddling in Ai’s case. Global Times’ response is normal work for a newspaper.

It isn’t. It’s the “normal work” of a childish bully with the full financial and political backing of a brutal autocracy. Also, please refrain from calling the Global Times a newspaper. It tends to make people retch.

Take Ai Weiwei, he should be cautious about his behavior, by invading the privacy of his criticizers because of criticism against him, he negated the expectations of those around him.

My grammar check in MSword brings up three green lines in that sentence. So, assuming it can be made grammatically correct, it’s incorrect. Those around Ai seemed to be in full support; some even went to prison for him, all while GT spewed editorials from its ears about how he is a pawn of the “West.”

The Chinese government should take measures to regulate the online order and curb the increasingly rampant violations on personal rights, including invasion of privacy and death threats. The relevant authorities should take actions to crack down on these illegal acts while safeguarding the freedom of speech.

Ai Weiwei did his thing on Twitter, so… wish granted. You can’t crack down on things you’ve already banned.

THE LESSON

That is what happens when propaganda turns on you, and it is not an isolated case. Similar things have happened with politicians like Bo Xilai, nations like Myanmar and even websites like Google. The moment something stops being convenient, the dogs are released and the floor is covered in blood.

In the end, the lesson here is that China has invented enemies, and you can become one in a second if you overplay your hand while in the public eye. It just takes one spotty editor in one rolly-chair to decide that you are detrimental to “society.” From then on, you are an assumed dissident and a plank for China to beat its imaginary enemies just because they may or may not have tried to stand up for you.

That is, unless, you wade through it all, wade through the hate-filled commentaries, the government bullying, the arrests of the people you love and respect, the alienation, the jail time and official condemnations of your talents; then maybe, just maybe, you get to be a rock star whose Gangnam Style video garners worldwide attention.

Worth it.

|To Serve People Archives|

By TAR Nation

The South China Sea is pretty boring to most people, normal people. But China’s reaction to politics in the region is priceless, a full-on charm/punching offensive in Southeast Asia.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations held a summit last week, during which we learned China has territorial disputes with, well, just about every member with a coastline.

To make the situation just a little less clear, here’s a map to help you out.

Yes, apparently in “ancient times,” the Chinese people decided that they owned a flaccid penis-shaped silhouette of real estate in the South China Sea. Actually, it’s pretty much the whole thing.

The real problem, the real problem, is America, according to the Chinese papers, and as you might expect, the US took quite the beating. To make sure the ASEAN played ball, China went on an all-out propaganda war with Southeast Asia on three major fronts.

1. Someone named Barax Oobama went on to Myanmar

For those of you keeping score at home, regardless of whether China should or should not be a democracy, there is no denying that the propaganda rags hate the very concept. This, coupled with the CPC, pretty much makes China’s media the single greatest enemy of democracy on the planet.

So, when the reelected Obama landed in Myanmar on his flying laser motorcycle of freshly-reelected badass, you can bet China wasn’t very supportive.

There was “US and Myanmar eyeing possible romance” in Global Times:

(The US) has been weighing whether it should set promoting democracy in Myanmar as the top priority or seek its own geopolitical strategic interests…Obama’s Myanmar visit highlights the selective use of democracy and human rights issues.

There was “What’s the intention of Obama’s visit to Asia” in People’s Daily:

Under the disguise of democracy, human rights and freedom, Obama tried to develop new partnership to expand the US presence and influence in Southeast Asia in Myanmar.

Democracy, human rights and freedom? The brigands. And from the same piece:

The Obama administration is playing trick in the “rebalance” strategy. But, Man proposes, God disposes. The “God” refers to the regional and global trends. Those who bow before it survive and those who resist perish.

But the most comprehensive attack came in the form of Ding Gang, the People’s Daily stooge. The Global Times liked his editorial so much, they published it three times in a row on their website, not that anyone but me would notice.

It also made the “Top News” section. Cause China insulting democracy and the US is what passes for “news” at the Global Times.

Ding Gang is one of the worst, down in the ranks of Hu Xijin and Shan Renping, though he’s perhaps even worse because he lives and works for People’s Daily in Bangkok, which greatly reduces the chances that one day I will be able run into him, over and over, with my head and fists. Mainly, he’s a tool, party-line vagina through and through.

Here are some gems from “US democracy no solution for ethnic issues”:

There is a sense of urgency in Obama’s emphasis of US democracy’s effects. US influence has actually declined to a level that makes him nervous… Even ordinary people can see this. [...]

US presidents can’t speak modestly about US democracy, nor can they see it as peculiar to the US. [...]

During his latest trip in Thailand, he made a similar statement, “It’s worked for us for over 200 years now, and I think it’s going to work for Thailand and it’s going to work for this entire region. And the alternative, I think, is a false hope that, over time, I think erodes and collapses under the weight of people whose aspirations are not being met.” …But in reality, there are no panaceas. Obama’s declaration sounded like former US president George W. Bush’s anti-terrorism declaration a decade ago that you were either “with us or against us.”

The gist of his editorial is that democracy won’t automatically solve issues to do with civil rights or, as Ding calls it, “ethnic integration.” This is true. He points out that democracies favor the majority, leaving out the minorities who don’t get with the program. Assuming that Ding Gang is under eight years old, I applaud him for this observation.

The ASEAN countries are (mostly, supposedly) democratic, and they have “ethnic integration” problems. China doesn’t have democracy, and it also has “ethnic integration” problems. Unfortunately, they’re rarely reported in the People’s Daily.

Every country has ethnic groups and minorities; they clash with the majority and with each other. Ding believes this is a good excuse for autocratic rule.

So, there you are, Southeast Asia: put democracy on hold to “integrate” your ethnic minorities. When your people start setting themselves on fire in protest of your cruelty and marginalization, then, maybe, talk about having some reform sometime in the next five decades, maybe. China-style.

The coverage of Obama was surprising, let alone the editorial onslaught, especially considering the orders from the Central Propaganda Department released in China Digital Times’s Ministry of Truth (note: if you don’t read CDT, you should) on November 16. The message from the propaganda department read, “During US President Obama’s trips to Thailand, Cambodia and Myanmar (Burma), Chinese leaders will simultaneously visit Thailand and Cambodia. Use only Xinhua copy. Downplay Obama’s visit.”

Yes, they actually say that. In case you were wondering, news coverage pretty much went by the letter, but Obama, and the US, got a thorough party-line going-over in the editorials.

2. ASEAN countries tell China to get stuffed

Despite kicking and screaming like a petulant child, the Chinese media didn’t get what it wanted. On December 12, the Phillipines will host a meeting with Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia to discuss China’s ongoing fuckery in the South China Sea.

China made five main things clear about the ASEAN:

1. Don’t discuss South China Sea disputes
2. Don’t listen to Obama
3. Don’t discuss South China Sea disputes
4. Don’t bring up democracy
5. Don’t discuss South China Sea disputes

China’s preferred (and agreed upon) strategy is to deal with the countries one-by-one. Because if you’re gonna be a bully, you don’t pick on the whole chess club at once. Those geeky bastards will put a rook in your urethra.

The odds are stacked against those who want to talk about South China Sea issues.

Cambodia is the host country. Cambodia is an ancient word meaning “China’s little bitch-boy.” Prime minister Hun Sen went a bit too far by trying to capsize the whole argument in the chairman’s statement, saying that ASEAN leaders speak only with China on the matter, not to “internationalize” the matter. SEA don’t play that.

So, the CPC struck back in their flagship bullocks factory, People’s Daily, with “ASEAN Summit should not deviate from theme due to anxiety.”

No one is ever really angry with China in the Chinese media; no, they’re just scared, or confused, or anxious. Only China understands and is never, ever wrong.

These actions of the leaders of the United States, Japan, and the Philippines reflect the restlessness caused by China’s huge increase in political and economic strength. The East Asia region is looking at China with ambivalent love and fear. The United States and Japan is trying to take advantage of such ambivalent psychology to stealthily substitute political issues for economic issues, thus containing China’s rise. [...]

ASEAN countries should not regard China as an imaginary enemy. No enemy would remain not to devalue its currency at the risk of its own economic downside during the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Compared to the style of some country that did not care the life or death of others but simply devalued its currency, one can easily tell which is better and which is worse.

The arrival of the Asian century does not exclude the participation of the United States. Asia welcomes the United States to strengthen ties with Asian countries through normal trade and economic activities. But any attempt to hook in “partners” and to isolate China will certainly end up void and vain.

Some country… brilliant. The subtlety of a mentally deficient elephant slamming its sweaty genitals in your face.

3. Wen is upset at the East Asia Summit, comforts himself with family’s 2.7 billion dollars

Wen was visiting the East Asia Summit when those bastard Filipinos and Vietnamese brought up the subject of island disputes. Then the Chinese media laid waste to the conversation with the Phillipines and Vietnam like some sort of… (don’t say carpet bombing, don’t say carpet bombing, don’t say carpet bombing)… carpet bombing. (Damn!)

On Thursday, this hit: “Harassing East Asia summit with island disputes was unwise.”

Raising the disputes on such an occasion is against the spirit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and risks escalating tension and harming the cooperative atmosphere among East Asian countries. [...]

The Philippines and Vietnam, however, distracted the summit by doggedly highlighting the disputes. When Cambodia, this year’s ASEAN chair, said at a meeting on Monday that the 10 ASEAN nations had agreed not to “internationalize” the rifts, Philippine President Benigno Aquino defied basic diplomatic rules to blatantly rebuke Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen. [...]

The Philippines’ and Vietnam’s disregard of diplomatic protocols was apparently driven by their coveting of the rich oil, gas and maritime resources in the South China Sea…China has a persistent and clear stance on the sovereignty over the Nansha Islands and their adjacent waters. [...]

Both Vietnam and the Philippines have been playing a crying for help card to seek bolster from countries outside the region, notably, the United States amid its Pivot to Asia strategy.

Those two countries intended to press China with the hands of U.S. President Barrack Obama [note: yes, they spelled his name wrong], who also attended the summit… Repeating the issue of navigation freedom in South China Sea was intended to disguise the real motive of certain countries.

“Certain countries,” so inscrutable.

China didn’t really get what it wanted out of the recent meetings in the South China Sea, but, then again, no one else did either.

With China’s current tone and stance, it’s perfectly acceptable for Southeast Asian countries to be scared and upset. As a matter of fact, I would suggest they give up altogether. They’ve no chance.

One thing becomes clear when looking at the state-run papers: China will never concede ownership of anything. China’s media is cruel, bloody minded and ignorant on matters of hypothetical sovereignty, and the government can easily organize mass hysteria, zealous patriotism and violence using these party papers. Convinced of their manifest destiny to run the South China Sea through sheer force of will and manufactured superiority, China’s nationalistic zeal is fueled by the media on an unstoppable diet of jingoism and sycophancy. The propaganda rags control so, so many, a menacing and relentless force.

On the other hand…

Never mind. It’s cool.

|To Serve People Archives|

By TAR Nation

His name is Liu Yunshan, and here’s why you should care: this will be (has been) the guy blocking your Twitter and New York Times, slowing down your Internet speed, ramping up diplomatic bile, telling Hu Xijin what to write in his god-awful columns and basically making China a worse place for everyone. He has had experience, but now, he has a seat at the big table.

There’s the face. The next time your proxy breaks down and you have to deal with “Chinanet,” that’s the face you should think about. Look into those dead eyes and feel despair.

He has been acting as the head of the Propaganda department for quite some time now, usually appearing with his predecessor Li Changchun. What has he been doing? Well, nothing good.

As both Changchun’s (and Hu Jintao’s) lapdog, he has been a consummate supporter of censorship and China’s disastrous and often embarrassing soft power pushes. As far as traditional media goes, it’s in the iron fist of the CPC and will remain there until you reading this are long dead. As analysts say in SCMP, Liu operates “like a fireman” bursting in to “crack down on state media when it steps out of line.”

So, let’s take a look at where our newly-anointed Lord and Master of the Dark Arts stands on other issues.

The Internet

Carolynne Wheeler at The Globe and Mail says, “Liu Yunshan… has presided over China’s draconian and ever-worsening censorship of the Internet.”

Liu doesn’t like the Internet. One of his favorite buzz-words for the past at least four years has been: Internet-related problems. He was also at the forefront of compulsory real-name registration on microblogging sites, not to mention the blocking of Twitter, Facebook, human rights websites and IMDB. His problem with the Internet comes in the form of “harmful information.”

As a general rule, when China blocks something like The New York Times or Facebook, they don’t make a big deal about it. Or any deal. They just pretend it didn’t happen and say it’s “in accordance with China’s laws,” which is true. Also, sad. The same information blackout goes for Liu Yunshan. But there is one instance when they pat themselves on the back pretty hard.

Porn. Everyone loves porn. Back in January-February 2009, Liu was at the forefront of the much bragged about crackdown that put the kibosh on 1,635 porn sites. Here’s what he had to say: “Internet pornography is not only preventing the healthy development of the country’s Internet services, but also eroding people’s mind, destroying the moral standard of the society and endangering young people’s healthy growth.”

Liu also said in February of that same year, “Work priorities should be given to purifying the environment of Internet, Internet bars, screens, audios and campus surroundings.” Under this crackdown, ISPs were encouraged to hire special personnel to supervise “lewd content.”

As far as Liu is concerned, the Internet is something to be cleaned up. Or, as said in People’s Daily, “All departments concerned should fully cooperate and people from all sectors of society should be mobilized to create a positive social and cultural environment that is helpful to the healthy growth of minors.”

He wasn’t joking about mobilizing; in November of 2010, 131 institutions and 202 individuals were awarded for their “outstanding efforts in China’s porn crackdown.” In 2010 again, even advertising agencies went under the knife for obscenity.

His ideas on porn haven’t changed. In February 2012, “Liu stressed a further crackdown on lewd content in the cultural market, especially online pornography.” Apparently, the Internet is part of the “cultural market.” Go figure.

Basically, the guy doesn’t like porn, online, wireless or on a mobile phone. Never has a man needing a good wank meant so much, to so many. In January of this year, he said, “Government at all levels should firmly eliminate pornography and other ‘cultural rubbish.’”

As a potential part of the “cultural rubbish,” I take offense.

Brainwashing

Having overseen $8 billion (or 2.9 Wen Jiabao families) poured into China’s overseas soft power push, his greatest belief is that China’s soft power pushes are, in fact, a media force to be reckoned with and not some sort of sad joke that has gotten out of hand.

In that wheelhouse are the Confucius Institutes, harmless language/community centers with a Chinese propaganda pitbull guarding the door. Look forward to more of those.

Remember National Day? You know, that other time the Communist Party came to town and ruined Beijing? Well, in August of 2009, Liu Yunshan called on authorities at various levels of government to “step up patriotic education” and urged authorities to incorporate patriotic education into the daily life of the Chinese people, to “turn their love for the country into concrete actions.”

“Morals,” somehow, are a big deal for Liu. He, of course, is a massive fan of the fictional character Lei Feng, calling him, “our model forever.” You can’t swing a cat in People’s Daily without hitting an article of him rambling on about the importance of “socialist culture” and the morals thereof.

But this vague road leads down a path of obscenity by Party consensus. In May 2012, while attending a video conference on “the development on morality,” he stated they were launching a campaign “to improve moral awareness.” In order to do this Liu assured the silent reporters present that “China will continue to screen movies and music for immoral content and step up related regulations for the cultural market.”

He is a proponent of “more efforts to educate the public on the CPC’s glorious history, valuable experience, splendid achievements and hardworking spirit to strengthen people’s confidence to keep to the socialism road with Chinese characteristics.”

And he is a little brainwashed himself. In 2010, at the annual Asia Media Summit, he said: “The Chinese media has always followed a policy of being true to facts, to life, and to the people, besides (also) promoting innovation in news and communication concepts, content, formats and techniques.”

Yeah. So much for the meritocracy gimmick.

Politics

He’s red. Bloody red and pretty far right. In May of this year, just a few months before attaining his crown, Liu made a speech for the 70th anniversary of a celebrated Mao Zedong speech on art and literature, celebrated insofar as I’ve never heard it and that Mao had a famously, shall we say, turbulent relationship with writers and intellectuals in general.

He “urged the writers to study Mao’s speech, which called for putting people first, promoting national unity and harmony and going to the grassroots to find inspiration.”

He is also a big fan of “red tourism,” a lot, which I honestly still can’t believe is a thing.

He supports and publicizes CPC history pushes and fawns over communist theory and its popularization.

As a politician in China, he calls for, stresses and vows things a lot, all without making promises or sense. For example:

1. Senior CPC official vows to develop friendly cooperation with French Communist Party
2. Senior CPC official calls for closer media co-op with Japan, ROK
3. Senior CPC official stresses publicity that caters to public understanding
4. Senior CPC official meets Cuban Raul Castro’s special envoy
5. Senior CPC official calls for greater development of acrobatics (seriously, that’s a real headline)

Those, believe it or not, are supposed to be news articles about Liu Yunshan.

It’s pretty difficult to find evidence of him being a prat, as he is the propaganda chief. People like that are pretty good at keeping things out of the news. The fact that the only coverage of him comes from the propaganda rags makes things worse.

At some point you’re just searching the propaganda newspapers run by the propaganda chief to search through the propaganda in the propaganda newspapers to find out about this propaganda chief’s particular brand of propaganda. It is what annoying people refer to as “meta.”

As to political affiliations, his closest is Hu Jintao, with whom he has had a long and toadying relationship, but to give you a little inkling of his leanings, he was promoted at light speed in 1993 to vice-minister of the propaganda department, many believe, due to his association with Bo Yibo. Yeah, Bo Xilai’s daddy.

Apparently, he wasn’t always terrible. In SCMP’s “Elevation of Liu Yunshan heightens censorship fears,” Du Daozheng, a former senior editor at the Xinhua news agency and Liu’s boss in the 1970s when Liu was a reporter in Inner Mongolia, said Liu became conservative after entering the party’s propaganda department.

However, for all of his boisterous support for “socialist theory” and communism in general, it’s more of a preach than practice sort of scenario.

Yanshan’s son Liu Lefei was chairman of CITIC Private Equity Funds Management (current CEO) and was listed by Brookings Institution as one of the “25 most powerful business people in Asia.” The Beijing-based CITIC investment company is, surprise, a state investment company. Liu Lefei made the move to CEO in June 2012 and, as Asia Venture Capital Journal puts it, “It wouldn’t be the first time the child of a political figure has stepped back (on paper, at least) supposedly for the sake of the parent.”

So, there we are, the man in charge of your media, Internet and newspapers for the next decade. Sorry.

|To Serve People Archives|

By TAR Nation

The phrase “China-bashing” has taken hold in the propaganda rags. Disgust, indignation and odium are liable to rain down like bukkake. This past week, government papers shot out editorial upon editorial on two occasions when US entities spoke about China. In one instance, it was presidential nominees; in the other, it involved arguably the greatest newspaper in the history of modern print journalism.

But here’s a little perspective: government-run papers hate the US every day. That’s just what they do. They wake up and hate, and they hate while eating lunch, and hate just before bed. So let’s look back at the week that was of hate – and insults – directed at the US in China’s ongoing disgrace to the Fourth Estate.

Monday, November 5

In “Unity priority during times of change,” Global Times takes a crack at America’s entire political system for seemingly no reason. The article’s not about the US: it’s part of a larger pastiche. Until election day and well after, China will probably be taking cheap shots at democracy. This is just the foreplay. Thus:

The most well-known electoral system in the West, that of the US, will go through its quadrennial elections for president on Tuesday. The election did not touch upon any concrete social problems. It’s more like a routine with some verbal sparring between candidates.

Ready for the knockout punch? Here comes.

China is totally different.

Boom! You like that, bitch? Where’s your little election now? Booyah!

The rest of the editorial reminds people that they need to be united during the Party Congress and that it’s okay to be diversified, ya know, later. There’s a little more brow-beating of “Western-style” democracy and elections, but nothing too scathing.

Also, our favorite Party paper – we mean Global Times, of course — did some beating on Hillary Clinton after claiming that China “helped” the US in the financial crisis, in some unknown mystical way.

Her sins?

Generally, Clinton’s role in Sino-US relations during her office has been negative. She undermined China’s trust toward the US. [...]

She harshly criticized China on several occasions without the appropriate style that a top diplomat should have. [...]

Clinton paid visits to China’s neighboring countries, and sowed discord and division between China and these countries. [...]

She promotes the idea of Sino-US competition in the Asia-Pacific region and looks for ways the US could balance China’s power. [...]

Her visits were more like putting on a show. [...]

She also turned the earlier positive approach of the Obama administration to China into more mutual friction. [...]

Clinton’s “efforts” did not necessarily yield the results she had expected. I can’t think of a major diplomatic legacy that she left behind. [...]

She has a strong sense of ideology and always stresses democracy and human rights.

Human rights and democracy? The bitch.

(Everyone always seems to miss the out-of-focus guy in that picture who looks like the barbarically racist Asian Mickey Rooney character. Velly solly, Hirrory Crinton.)

Today wasn’t all bad though. People’s Daily published “Cooperation key to future Sino-US ties” and “Americans in China expect better Sino-American relations.” But these are pretty cut and paste articles, interviews with people who are less interesting than anyone I have ever personally met. Also, they come next to a photo piece called, “North Korea dear respected leader watches soccer game.” So, grain of salt with that flat flattery.

Tuesday, November 6

Where to begin? I suppose with People’s Daily (reprinted from Jiefeng Daily): “Does China lack ‘great diplomacy’ strategy?”

A dumb question, stupidly asked, and the answer is yes. The US is hellbent on enslaving the planet, if you didn’t know, and China is here to welcome you into its benevolent bosom (warning: bosom may contain knives). That’s basically China’s foreign policy. The view of the CPC is that there are two competing world diplomatic strategies. With diplomatic debonair, the author puts it thusly: China…

…pursues a harmonious world established by China based on the philosophical principle of harmony and diversity.

Ready for the other side of this weighted trick coin? Here goes: USA…

…aims for a peaceful world ruled by the United States based on American values.

Actually, those are kind of identical, except for the minor grammatical switch of “established” for “ruled” and “American values” for … whatever that other stuff is.

If it were the case that you had to choose, I might suggest going with the one that doesn’t consider human rights websites a national threat. But that’s just me.

The editorial suggests there are “keywords” to diabolically ruling the world for both nations. Apparently, these keywords for America are “leading status” and “never settle for number two.” For China, it’s “equal partners” and “win-win cooperation.” As far as I’m aware, there are four “keywords” for world domination: Evening, Mister, Good and Bond.

On the same day, there was “Powerful interests work against expression of US democracy” by some quisling conspiracy theorist twat named Norman. This is what should be expected for the next day’s election, except it’ll probably be from Hu Xijin and much, much worse, similar to GT’s abhorrence of the French elections.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012: ELECTION DAY

Well, this was pretty easy to see coming, a scathing indictment of human beings participating in their government by none other than the man himself, the Beast with the Least, the Master Insult Caster, the Sino Rhino: Hu “The Fuck Carcass” Xijin!

The editorial is “Be wary of populism led by democracy.” It’s barely readable and completely insane.

At this point it’s just depressing. No one has more deplorable opinions, more idiotic assumptions, more hairbrained fuckwittery than Hu Xijin. Enjoy.

No matter who wins… the problems in the US will remain. [...]

The electoral system encourages populism. Parties and politicians are slowly turned into its captives.

The article is pretty hard to follow if you don’t speak Batshit, but after possibly dogging on “civil rights” (in language I can’t even begin to understand), he goes on to say:

The concepts of effort and hard work will become outdated. The overall progress of the country has become an issue of secondary importance. [...]

However, Western governments have given up their responsibility to lead society and now only shuffle voters and votes. [...]

There’s no perfect political system. However, China’s current system is widely considered to be an effective one. The efficiency of this system is both outstanding and rare.

The most precious thing in the world is development. Some people think that happiness is more important than development. [...]

China has already experienced the old days, when there was a low standard of fairness. But now, who wants to go back to that time? [...]

This should alarm Chinese society. The spirit of hard work and effort must not be replaced by unrealistic welfarism.

Yeah, that’s right. A staunchly Communist fiscal conservative. It doesn’t get any worse.

You know what, just read it. I can’t do any more. It’s bad. It’s Hu Xijin. He’s is a bad, bad person. It all piles up. It never stops. No matter what happens, the CCP will never let go of its stranglehold on the media. There is no hope. None. Can’t stand it anymore. It’s all too much. Can’t go on… unless…

10:54 am, November 7, same day

Found Hu Xijin’s phone number, called him a cunt in two languages. Ahhhhhh, that’s better. It’s not free press, but it’ll do for now.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Obama wins and the world rejoices, but the CCP is not to be outdone by some silly Americans and their ridiculously outdated political system. Everyone knows a pseudo-royal merit/autocracy makes the trains run on time (note: trains may also be on fire {sub note: train accidents should not be covered in the media without approval. Your friend, Xinhua}).

With Obama the winner, GT wades into him with “Obama’s second term will show his true colors.” Again, it’s an indictment of America’s political system and the idea that those who rule draw their legitimacy from the consent and will of the governed. Also, they find time to say that the US is terrified of China’s inevitable “rise.”

Even Obama’s tiniest achievement in terms of economic recovery has been cherished by the public. [...]

The world faces another four years of dealing with the Obama administration and a lot of this weight falls upon China. [...]

It remains uncertain whether the US will calmly accept the fact that China is catching up with it. [...]

The smart diplomacy promoted by Secretary Hillary Clinton, though making some trouble for China, has brought no tangible gain to the US. It is widely seen as a failed policy. [...]

The US, as a country, has grown less confident but more suspicious. [...]

Perhaps we need a stronger psychological grounding, to have a certain degree of tolerance of US distrust toward China.

Not as bad as yesterday, but a theme persists: Americans are afraid of China.

I was once told by someone much smarter than me that someone is only as strong as what terrifies them. If it is true that Americans are afraid of China, that’s not bad. It’s the most populous country, shut off from the outside world, led by second-generation insecure sadists. That’s pretty scary on paper.

China is afraid of Facebook.

Trying to poke the US with a pointy stick also came in the form of Xinhua’s “As US elections wind down, so might China bashing” and People’s Daily’s “America’s problem: Money politics seldom supports reform.” The Chinese version is here. GT also had “Seven hour wait to vote; this election is shameful” (Chinese).

Friday, November 9

A day packed with 18th Party Congress propaganda. Surely, today is safe. Surely, the papers will be full of propaganda of how great and totally, totally legitimate it is to have a ruling authoritarian power. Surely, they won’t take time out of their busy propaganda schedule to shamelessly harass the US with meaningless bile-filled gibberish.

I was doing sarcasm just now.

Actually, the papers are more full of them today than any other day this week. Let’s get stuck in.

First, People’s Daily’s “US ‘duel deterrence’ is self defeating” is a full-out attack on the US’s non-interference strategy in the Diaoyu Islands debacle, basically calling on the US to make a decision on the matter and also, somehow, stay out of it. US diplomacy is depicted as some sort of clever trickster playing both sides.

This is called a “diplomatic trick of the US” and is frowned upon by “China.” Actually, it’s funny they should mention that. I can think of another “duel deterrence” strategy that’s worked out pretty well so far, called the One-China Policy.

Next up, a Global Times attack on the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, saying Chinese investment in US companies could be a “potential Trojan Horse.” The unnamed editorial says it “shocked us.”

I have no idea who “us” is supposed to be. Could be China, could be the staff at GT (though a+a=b would have them shocked), and it could just be the voices in Hu Xijin’s head. No clue.

Here are some gems:

The US, which used to be at the top of the chain, is gradually feeling a sense of crisis. [...]

Such a mentality is spreading throughout the West. China cannot make one-sided sacrifices to eliminate it. [...]

On Wednesday, the US International Trade Commission decided to issue anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders against China’s photovoltaic industry. China will certainly respond. If the US is indeed in decline, then these two commissions are accomplices to this. [...]

The Chinese, who have worried about US ambitions of subjugating China, have become positive, if not blindly so, while the Americans, who had no fear in the past, have become oversensitive, speculating as to the motives of Chinese companies.

We don’t know whether these concerns are genuine, or whether the accusations are just a disguise for trade protectionism.

…We? Who are you?!

Next, again from GT, is “Obama faces steep uphill political climb.”

It’s basically a 4th grade social studies understanding of presidential terms, but then it falls into one-line paragraphs that make the editorial look and sound like poetry. Credit where it’s due: the editorial held out for a whopping 13 paragraphs before mentioning China. Then, the zit popped:

Obama may adjust his foreign policy toward China in his second term. To please voters, most US presidents put much pressure on China in their first term.

They take high-profile containment measures toward China when they have just taken office, and they put pressure on China when they pursue reelection.

After they enter their second term, these presidents may adjust Sino-US relations in the interests of the wider country, no longer worrying about voters. [...]

We are already aware of these conflicts of interest and some of them have already been resolved. Overall, we can be optimistic about the prospects of Sino-US relations.

WE! Again! TWICE! Please, someone find out who these people are. They could be in need of help, slowly drowning, and we don’t even know it.

The Week:

Well, that was China’s relationship with the US. There was a lot more. A lot. But from China Daily to Xinhua, the game plan was pretty clear: berate, insult and otherwise lambast the US on a daily basis in lieu of legitimacy or respect.

Regular readers of Chinese newspapers will know that one of the favorite whipping boys for the Chinese press, be it the Dalai Lama or the economy, is the Western media, specifically the US media. Well, for a little perspective on that, let’s look at some China editorials from The New York Times, a respected paper around the world that was banned in China recently for… reporting.

There were three editorials. Three. On the most important week in Chinese politics in a decade, there were three editorials on NYT China in the same time period. One brazenly open attack on Chinese employers from Han Dongfang called “China’s Workers Unite,” one by Ezra F. Vogel on Deng Xiaopeng’s model for future leaders, and one extremely critical take from Wang Lixiong on what it’s like under the tyranny of China’s 18th Party Congress push. Please, forgive me if I missed a few, but my proxy is leaking, and I’m about to sink.

There were a lot more news articles on China in NYT, of course. But The New York Times does news. It’s a “Western media” thing.

|To Serve People Archives|

By TAR Nation

“Public accepts other views despite anger” is a piece from He Hu Should Not Be Named (or born for that matter) about some 2,200 tourists aboard the cruise ship Costa Victoria.

“Tourists?” I hear you say through my mind’s ear-hole. Yes, tourists. They did something insidious, something unthinkable, something that will make your blood boil and your bones do the dougie. They went to…

The traitors.

The insidious Jap devils were devious enough to warmly welcome the 2,200 tourists to their festival in Kumamoto, just the kind of thing those island-stealing demons do on a daily basis to gain trust from the West and the Dalai Lama and his clique of dog-faced shin-kickers! Those bastards even sent devious Chinese-raping high school students to the reception holding banners reading “Welcome” in Chinese. Does their perfidy know no bounds?

The “news” seems to consist of “netizens” being useless prattling twats. They claim that money they spend in Japan will be used in the coming war against Japan and America, that the people on board have no patriotism and that microblogging is a good use of their time, despite the fact that Weibo is… well, if I were to make a logo for it, it would be a castrated bunny with alopecia being crucified.

Basically, this is a minor mess that “netizens” made out of thin air. The Costa Victoria didn’t spring from ocean foam like Venus. The Italian owners have been carrying Chinese tourists to Japan for years. Nevertheless, here we find ourselves.

So, the Global Times waded into the waters, suggesting that this was, in fact, freedom we are all seeing.

According to GT, here are your options, Chinese people, so listen up:

People have the right to express their dissatisfaction by not traveling to Japan. They are also allowed to put their personal interests above the national interest.

Cancel your business trips and burn (cook?) sushi in the streets for the motherland like a good red patriot who loves China or be a traitorous Jap-loving dog. Your choice.

But, let’s be fair. This is a step forward as GT editorials go. It’s an attempt to be understanding. Less Darth Vader, more Anakin just before slaughtering all the younglings.

Mostly the piece is back-patting, showing that China is a modern wonderful Toontown-like world where people have the RIGHT to disagree with the mainstream. For those of you keeping score at home, the mainstream is what the People’s Daily tells you it is (the GT editorial was republished on People’s Daily).

The fact that the government is not intervening should be viewed as progress.

No. No it shouldn’t. Not beating Hu Xijin to death with a baseball bat while hovering over him screaming “Who’s homogenous now, motherfucker!” is not proof that I am peaceful. What it proves is that I want to do something, but haven’t. Like an adult.

Also, this isn’t everyone’s view.

Yang Bojiang, director of Japanese Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said, “There is nothing to argue about regarding the recent group tour to Japan, since traveling to Japan at this time or not should be left to tourists to decide.” Apparently — and I was made completely unaware of this but have been educated by “netizens” — China is preparing for war with Japan. Go figure.

Chinese people no longer have identical opinions on major issues.

Hmmm. That seems to be slightly at odds with EVERY SINGLE EDITORIAL IN THE GLOBAL TIMES, EVER. The propaganda rags use the word “China” as a concrete noun with feelings, emotions and complex thought, swiftly followed by what happens when you disagree with “China.” In Chinese editorials, China has things, does things, owns things, sees things, feels things, suspects things — and it has one opinion. This is evidenced by the at least 25 the-Japanese-are-bastards editorials this week. Perhaps, and I’m just brainstorming here, if Chinese people don’t have “identical opinions” anymore, then maybe, please, just maybe, can we please, just for a bit, not have identical newspapers and media outlets? Take this from the previously mentioned China Daily article: “If Japan misuses China’s friendship and hurts its interests, China will certainly pay back in the same coin.” Countries don’t have friendships. I barely have friendships.

Certain percentages of the public disagree with or show indifference to mainstream views. It is a very normal phenomenon in such a huge society. Minority views should be respected.

Yup, it says that. You heard it here first, folks. So, if you think Rabeeya Kadeer is a sweet piece of ass, that the Dalai Lama is just a religious leader and great dancer, Communism is balls and that Ghengis Khan had some pretty good ideas (H/T Newsroom), now’s the time to send your editorial to GT. Go on. Your minority opinion “should” be respected.

The government should leave it up to the public to decide how they deal with Japanese products. In fact, the official policies toward Japan in recent years have been intended to reflect the will of the Chinese public, rather than guide public opinion.

…m’kay. Just gonna let that stew. Done stewing? Moving on.

So, there you go, Chinese people. You are free to “put (your) personal interests above the national interest” (sorta).

Free at last, free at last.

Actually, credit where it’s due, the Chinese press didn’t go balls-out crazy over it. This Global Times article even quotes Kiichi Matsuki, head of the Yatsushiro Chamber of Commerce and Industry, as saying, “I hope their visit will be a chance to melt the snow between Japan and China.” And around the horn, headlines were mostly either “Chinese tourists to Japan spark debate” or “Web users angered over Japan tour.” Though many “web users” seemed to be pretty cruel, the Chinese press tried to highlight the less childishly nationalistic bits, hinting that this is a sign that tensions won’t last forever. China Daily got on board with “Visiting Japan not a crime.”

However, many articles included words like “ancient times,” which we’re all so fond of. People’s Daily also couldn’t help mentioning that the “friction” between China and Japan is attributed to “Japanese right-wing politicians.” And we return to the top-linked GT piece:

One cruise carrying Chinese tourists headed toward Japan should not be taken as a sign that the Chinese anger toward Japan has ceased.

I love dashing hope. On the Chinese side, the discussion has taken on economic vibes, saying that Japan can’t outlast the economic woes brought to it through Chinese general ire. Bullying, basically.

But Japan seems to take a different tone. Exports and imports be damned, Japan likes Chinese tourists. Hiro Yoshida, director of Tourism & Convention, Fukuoka City Government, says, “What I hear so far is there’s very little impact. On the contrary, the popularity of Hakata Port is increasing.” That was said a little over a month ago, right around the time 7/11s were still getting a going over. Renho, a member of the Upper House of the Diet of Japan, recently said that the whole country was looking forward to more Chinese tourists. Last Monday, the governor of Hokkaido said via Japan Today, “It is impossible that people in Hokkaido dislike China,” even going so far as to point out that they have land for sale to foreigners, with 21 Chinese-owned companies proudly owning land in the region.

All this despite the government-organized protests and state media-sponsored borderline racism from the CCP. Japan has its crazy rightists, but thankfully, they’re not in charge of anything as important as, say, oh I don’t know, the entire national press. Even an alien from a distant galaxy made of bacon grease would have to admit that China has made itself extremely dislikable in the issue over those stupid, stupid, stupid stupid, stupid fucking bastard islands. There’s talk of an economic war and “netizens” talk of an all-out war. If it’s to be a PR war, I’m sorry comrades, but China doesn’t have a prayer.

Also this week, Japan’s attempt at discussions are futile in the face of good ol’ bullying, Presidential candidates shouldn’t talk about China as that is the first rule of China club, calls for environmental reform sprayed through spit that smells like CCP cock, pooping on Robert D. Kaplan’s The Revenge of Geography, Public angered over Chinese woman’s “forcedkowtow,”  “marriage without housing is sexual harassment,” more praise for how the CCP has handled the Daioyu Islands debacle (from the CCP flagship newspaper), and the US presidential candidates shouldn’t talk about China, devoting to it an entirely new sub-site from the people who brought you North Korean Beauties, The People’s Daily: here.

|To Serve People Archives|

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

By TAR Nation

Liao Yiwu won the 2012 Peace Prize of the German Book Trade, causing Global Times columnist Shan Renping to act like a baby, a baby in sore need of being bashed against a tree.

The media went balls-to-the wall, calling Liao insane for, perhaps overzealously, shouting at his acceptance speech, saying China was an “ever-expanding garbage dump” and “an inhumane empire with bloody hands” (note: true, but who hasn’t been to a bachelor party like that). At the end, he shouted “the empire must break apart” six times.

What did China’s propaganda rags do? Raise your hand if you know the answer…

That’s right class: they called Liao Yiwu a “bigot,” accused him of being insane, affronted the whole of Germany, and bragged about the Nobel Prize win with the righteous approach of a masturbating hyena.

Let’s start with Shan Renping’s words:

Some Chinese dissidents that the West chooses to support are mediocre in ethics and wisdom. They catch eyes through political radicalism, since they are unable to deal with the normal competition within Chinese society.

“Unable to deal with the normal competition in Chinese society”? Okay Renping, let’s talk a little about Liao Yiwu’s “normal competition.” You see, whether or not he’s a good writer (note: he definitely fucking is. Get Corpse Walker on Kindle here), Liao Yiwu’s life is a perfect example of how you can’t disagree with the party and get a fair shake. Get ready for a big sexy paragraph.

Yiwu barely survived Mao’s Great Famine, suffering from an array of ailments, not to mention the lack of, ya know, food. His father was denounced as a counterrevolutionary during the Cultural Revolution (Mao’s great idea to set human history on fire), so his parents divorced to keep the kids safe. But, lo and behold, his mom was caught using the black market (i.e. trying to sell some cloth to get food for her kids). As a result she was “paraded, along with other criminals, on the stage of the Sichuan Opera House in front of thousands of people.” I can’t imagine why this guy held a grudge. After high school, he worked as a truck driver and cook, traveling the Sichuan-Tibet Highway and becoming a well-known poet in the process. His work in underground magazines (and everyone else’s for that matter) were called “spiritual pollution” by the Party authorities. After publishing “The Yellow City” and “Idol,” his home was searched, and he was repeatedly interrogated. The magazines he published in were subsequently closed and punished. Afterwards he was arrested, along with six friends and his pregnant wife, and Liao was given four years imprisonment in 1990. Under torture in the prison system, including torture with electric batons, being forced to stand in the sun for hours and having his hands tied behind his back for 23 straight days, he started to go mad (and grow large gross abscesses in his armpits). The other prisoners gave him the nickname “the big lunatic,” because prisoners aren’t known for their creativity (which is surprising as being creative in China gets you locked up). The torture got so bad that he tried to kill himself by bashing his head against the wall. He got out in 1994 due to protests from the West, only to find that, in his absence, his wife had absconded with his child. He spent four years largely destitute until he published The Fall of the Holy Temple, which ended with the publisher being forbidden from publishing anything for a year (on the orders of a vice-premier). Destitute again, he worked odd jobs and published Interviews with People from the Bottom Rung of Society . It was, in the words of the Asia Literary Review, “sanitized” for publication, becoming a massive hit in China. After all of his tortures, loss and imprisonment, he stayed in China – Chengdu – under police surveillance with his wife until 2010 when he wrote to Angela Merkel herself to get permission to leave the country, which was granted. He was denied exit again to the US prior to the release of an English translation of his book. At the PEN Festival, Salaman Rushdie left an empty chair on the stage for him, writing to Liao and saying, “Quite simply, we miss you.” The Communist Party forced him to sign a declaration that he would not publish any “illegal books” abroad. He escaped by land into Vietnam, then Warsaw, then Berlin. Why? In his own words, “Personal freedom and freedom to write.”

That’s normal competition, is it? Shan Renping pretty much just went to the People’s Daily compound and opened his mouth so that they could make sure that it did, indeed, smell like CCP cock. Adding up all of the political persecution, imprisonment, torture, marginalization and general fucked-upness of life for the curious in an intellectual graveyard, it doesn’t really sound fair to me. As I have none, I can only guess that being someone with talent in China carries with it consequences. As Liao Yiwu put it, “flee, sit in prison or shut up.”

So, let’s see how this disgusting piece of detritus, Shan Renping, goes on to insult Yiwu from his ivory tower at GT (ivory made from dissident bones).

The speech makes some people doubt his judgment and the ability to control his own emotions. It’s surprising that Germany picks such a bigoted person as the award winner.

The “control his own emotions” jibe is perhaps better put in the Global Times “Voices” where they quote Kong Qingdong, professor at the Chinese Department of Peking University, when he says, “People have the freedom to be schizophrenic,” which, apart from being impertinent, is untrue. Laio Yiwu spent four years in prison, decades under surveillance and lives in exile because of his “schizophrenia.”

Moving on:

Liao’s performance will make the Chinese look down upon Germany’s wisdom and breadth of thought in awarding the prize to Liao.

Goodness me? The “Chinese” looking down on a country in the West? Shock! Horror! Chaos! Dogs and cats living together! Sarcasm! There you go, blame an entire country for a prize, just like the Nobel. If I’m ever in ill-repute with the Communist authorities, the New Haven 4th Grade School Science Fair will surely be a “Westerner-loving charade” in the eyes of the Chinese propaganda rags.

But China’s reform and opening-up is a process of building up social justice and increasing individual rights and dignity. Those who cannot feel the momentum are either closing themselves off or fail to separate their personal experience from the zeitgeist.

It doesn’t count as increasing “rights and dignity” if you’re the one who took them away in the first place, not to mention the daily savaging “rights and dignity” take in the propaganda rags. If I beat a guy up, steal his car, drive it into a telephone pole and poop in his back seat before returning the car, I did not “increase” his car ownership. “Zeitgeist,” though, is a good word. I like that word. Where does that come from again?

Germans probably think this award could exert some influence on China. But Chinese are used to Westerners using dissidents.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Communist Party’s official line on China’s dissidents, they think Western countries collect them like baseball cards to use against “China.” Shan Renping has done this so often, he has a little box of self-made dissident cards under his bed that he plans to trade for things like fresh-smelling soaps and nozzles — you know, douche-related materials. Also, Liao Yiwu doesn’t consider himself a refugee of any sort. When asked if he was a refugee by New Yorker reporter Philip Gourvitch, Liao said, “I’m excited about political developments in China, and looking forward to a Jasmine Revolution. I am quite sure that Hu Jintao may be a refugee some day, but not Liao Yiwu.”

Chinese dissidents who have been abroad should have the responsibility to overcome hatred… Public has expected that these dissidents can have broader horizons and take a more rational and objective attitude to China after they leave the country. However, their minds have become more and more narrow.

Shan Renping’s mind is so narrow you could stab someone with it, preferably him. Dissidents aren’t more hateful when they leave, they’re just allowed to say stuff and not get thrown in prison. No one wants to be hateful when speaking out, or, as Liao Yiwu said in the New York Review of Books, “My writing is illegal… I don’t know. I’m just writing something and now have broken their law. I don’t want to break their laws. I am not interested in them and wish they weren’t interested in me.”

Cards on the table, Liao Yiwu probably is not stable. He attempted suicide. When his magazine poems were banned, he belted them out in audio recordings in chants as if in religious fervor. He is a bit shouty (big lunatic).

Perhaps he’s completely nuts. Luckily, those are the kind of writers everybody likes. JD Salinger was so nuts he chose to be a recluse in New Hampshire of all places, Philip K. Dick thought “pink beams” of light were giving him messages, Hunter S. Thompson was so crazy that he convinced the world it was a choice, Poe fucked the shit out of his underaged cousin/wife and had hallucinations, Kurt Vonnegut famously took up smoking as a “classy” way to commit suicide, and Hemingway ate two barrels for breakfast one day, probably because he thought he was just that badass.

So, maybe being a bit loud about an award isn’t all that terrible.

Still, on behalf of the free world, thanks for another inspiring genius, China. We’re happy to have them.

Also this week, Japan can eat a dick, South Korea can eat a dick, Japan can eat a dick, America can eat a dick, Japan can eat a dick again, the ASEAN (also America) can eat a dick, America can eat a dick, Japan can eat yet another dick, America can eat another dick, Japan and South Korea can eat a dick, and (“evil”) America and Japan can eat a dick. I wonder why China is a diplomatic pariah. For a really, really good laugh, a laugh that makes you want to throw up and kill yourself, check out, “Poll: Chinese public satisfied with selection of officials.”

|To Serve People Archives|

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

By TAR Nation

Hu “The Gelded Fuckwit” Xijin took a moment this week to remind everyone that no one should pay any attention whatsoever to the Nobel Prize, unless it is won by a Chinese person that has yet to get in trouble.

Having hated the West, Westerners, the Nobel Prize and human thought for his entire “journalistic” career, Hu “The Pitiless Twat” Xijin was surprised by the Nobel Committee’s choice.

Hu “The Massive Douche-Covered Cunt” Xijin has a complicated relationship with the Nobel. For example, many may remember when he supported denying Norwegian Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik a visa and the cancellation of ministerial level talks after the Nobel Committee awarded Liu Xiaobo the Nobel Peace Prize.

With this in mind, Hu “The Mop-headed Vagina Face” Xijin penned “Nobel Prize a win for mainstream values.”

Here are a few lovely little nuggets from Hu “The Unfortunately Un-shanked” Xijin:

Ordinarily, we should treat the Nobel Prize with indifference, as past prizes have tended to be politicized, just like the peace prize.

Note: Hu “The Painful Mole that Might be Cancer” Xijin suggests that all Chinese people are simply a pronoun in his mind, “we.” He actually thinks he speaks for a nation of people. He’s that nuts.

The editorial goes on to clarify Hu “Smegma” Xijin’s agenda vis-à-vis being a tit, as he denounces three Nobel Laureates: the Dalai Lama, Liu Xiaobo and Gao Xingjian, whose works are largely banned.

Chinese people generally believed that Gao was awarded this prize because of the political leanings in his literary works.

Despite Gao’s books being banned across the board, Hu “The War Criminal” Xijin (who I’m surprised can read) suggests that ALL Chinese people (undoubtedly the shrewdest of literary scholars) judged Gao’s work to be dreck, suitable only for the most unctuous Western political palate.

For readers of… well… things, it will be immediately apparent that Hu “The Anal Polyp” Xijin hates all things Western. Everything. All of his compasses are half-circles. But, in this even, he was positively ecstatic about the West. He was so glad that the Chinese will one day peacefully liberate the Nobel Prize from its imperialist aggressors.

Mo is a mainstream Chinese writer. This suggests that the West doesn’t only embrace individuals that are against the Chinese system. It cannot reject the Chinese mainstream for long. No matter what inspired the award this time, it is a welcome decision. We hope such appreciation of Chinese mainstream ideas can extend further.

There’s that “we” again. And:

This reflects the greater attention the West is giving China. The Nobel Prize is closing the distance with China in its own way.

To round up, Hu “The Drug Resistant Tuberculosis” Xijin decided to warn the Nobel Committee of an impending takeover.

China has created many miracles in the past three decades, including lasting economic growth without incurring any wars. This should be recognized by the Nobel committee, which shouldn’t only focus on the fringes of Chinese society. It doesn’t add to the glory of Nobel Prize if it is at odds with China for long.

Also, another GT editorial, “Dissidents Alone in Ruining the Mo-ment,” is equally deplorable, droning on like a robot less intelligent than a toaster about what ALL Chinese people “think.”

By now, everyone has heard of Mo Yan, his Nobel and even some words uttered about Liu Xiaobo. Some are pissed because they don’t like the fact that an apolitical Chinese author won. Others are turning the spotlight on China’s repressive political system. The newspapers seem to think this means the West is coming around to China’s way of thinking about intellectuals and politics, largely because their editors are all mentally sub-normal.

Personally, I’m reminded of a Stephen Jay Gould quote: “I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.

So, pour one out for all the great Chinese literary homies that didn’t make it through the past, can’t stand up in the present and are too scared of the future to bother.

This Week’s Hottest Autocrat 

Chicks and China both love bad boys, but whereas girls like motorcycles and fighting, Beijing’s newspapers get all wet and sticky for just about any dictator that considers a 30-foot portrait of themselves a “public works” project. Kim Jong Il, Bashar al-Assad, The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, the list is endless.

First up on the authoritarian hotties list is the Despot with the Soft-spot, the Latin in the Satin Straightjacket, the one, the only: Hugo “Boss” Chavez!

As despots go, he’s mild at best, but you just can’t buy his kind of crazy. From the US-made Haiti Earthquake Machine to saying NATO gave him cancer, Hugo is an unending source of harmless foolishness. Harmless, that is, unless you’re all, like, obsessed with human rights.

The Chinese press had a rare treat this week when one of their beloved psychotic allies was elected freely and “fairly” in elections, of a sort.

Nevertheless, in China Daily’s “Chavez expected to boost China links,” the courageous Chinese press fought hard and got the line “Radical reform or change is unlikely to happen during the next term of re-elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.” Hooray! Critical analysis!

Followed quickly by, “but he will continue to implement policies that benefit the poor and become closer to China.”

Un-hooray.

The only mention of Chavez’s little “bat-shit nuts” problem was in the line, “On foreign policy, Chavez is a self-sufficient revolutionary, known for calling the former US President George W. Bush ‘the devil’.”

They omitted the fact that he is probably more famous for calling the Israelis “like Hitler.” Now, that’s diplomacy.

In true Chinese propaganda-style, People’s Daily announced his victory with, “Chavez claims election victory defeats int’l coalition against him.”

Still, he won, so here’s a drink to your populist psychosis — you lovable nut, you.

The Huawei of all Flesh

The Chinese propaganda rags have a habit of referring to things in China as “China.” This is the case with Huawei or ZTE. These two companies ran into a spot of bother with the House of Representatives Permanent Select Intelligence Committee, if you haven’t heard.

The Global Times issued a reasoned and nuanced retort to the main accusations made by the Committee.

Ha! Just kidding. They wrote this: “Why does US fear Chinese telecom giants?”

The US is gradually becoming reduced to an unreasonable country.

Said the Global Fucking Times.

It is because the US government wants to protect the interests of US companies that it is being so unreasonable.

Yeah, to have figured that one out, you would have had to have done something crazy like, you know, read the report.

China cannot be as generous as it was before.

Yup, “generous.” That’s what everyone thinks of when they think of China’s business practices, not “hopelessly subservient to party whims” or “lacking in quality control.” Nope. It’s all about the generosity.

The thing is, this very editorial (and many like it) are rock hard evidence that China doesn’t play fair when it comes to international commerce. The view of the CCP is that if you even get near to screwing with anything Chinese, they will poop upon you from a great height. The horde of government-owned newspapers will descend en masse and create a diplomatic horror storm where there was none.

This was seen before, when the Confucius Institutes had a hissy fit. Before the Chinese government editorial blitz, I would have said Confucius Institutes were harmless soft power pushes. After, I say gut them and turn them into Taco Bells.

The report from the US House Intelligence Committee is right here. As a matter of fact, on the same site, I recommend the responses from Huawei and ZTE regarding the original concerns here and here.

The report and further investigations have been bitchy to say the least, and it is just sticking it to China. The overall gist of the tiff goes a little something like this:

US House Intelligence Committee: Hey! Are you going to roll over for the Communist Party if they ask?

Huawei and ZTE: We are great companies that bring development to China.

Intelligence Committee: No, really, seriously, are you going to fuck with us just because the CCP gets a bug up its ass?

Huawei and ZTE: Years ago, Shenzhen was just a small city, but today, it is more like Silicon Valley, a Silicon Valley that has been part of China since ancient times.

Intelligence Committee: Dude!

Huawei and ZTE, snickering: Okay, no, we promise we won’t spy just because the Communist Party tells us to.

Intelligence Committee: And you promise that we can take a look at your books?

Huawei and ZTE: Yes.

Intelligence Committee: The important stuff? You know, so we can make sure that your companies aren’t involved in state secret keeping?

Huawei and ZTE: HA! No! It is a state secret! (They run out of the room laughing.)

The report is obviously trying to piss off China’s public sector, a feat half as difficult as simply succumbing to gravity. In reality, this whole debacle raises some very important questions. Can any large Chinese business ever really be private? What is the effect of this endless media bullying? Does not having an objective oversight body harm Chinese business interests abroad?

Oh well, I’m sure Huawei isn’t getting into our phones and computers to HAPPY MOTHERLAND IS GIVE YOU MANY GOODS AND DEVELOPMENT. HATE JAPAN. HAVE A GOOD NIGHTTIME!!!!!! J

|To Serve People Archives|

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

By TAR Nation

Mad Libs is a “phrasal template word game,” according to Wikipedia, and who better to provide the template for such comedy than our favorite mouthpieces of the CCP? Let’s play.

|To Serve People Archives|

Taiwanese daughter pleads for Falun father, via The Epoch Times

Self-immolator dies after a month of agony, via Radio Free Asia

Blogger beat down draws Beijing’s finest, via Beijing Cream (in fairness to GT, they were on the story first)

China may be forced into into internet freedom by private companies, via Asian Correspondent

Netizens enraged over chained orphans, via The Telegraph

Human flesh search engines fight back in Shifang, via The Epoch Times

|To Serve People Archives|

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

By TAR Nation

First:

SPACE!

[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

Footer:

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|

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

By TAR Nation

So, the Chinese government has taken all the good stuff off the Internet, from porn to videos of monkeys sniffing their own butts. Radio, television and film are all under the thumb of the oppressively stupid and black-marker-happy SARFT. And let’s not even get started on the sorrowfully sodomized social media.

But then again, it doesn’t take all that to make fun of the CPC, a trundling soviet behemoth of inanity. In fact, using 21st-century video-sharing technology feels like cheating. So today, we’ll use gifs, a tech that began in 1987. Gifs are small, easy to make and can even show up on comment forums. What’s more, no one has banned gif sites yet. Here’s the best part: they never stop. Ever. Long after you have died, that gif of a happy-slapping will live on in some far-flung corner of the Internet, again, and again, and again. LONG LIVE THE GIF!

Lesson 1: How to address the Sino-Russian relationship

Example: China, Russia offset West’s actions in Syria (Global Times)

“The West should not expect China and Russia’s cooperation if it insists on dictating its own values and mindsets to the world by any means it can. It will instead find China and Russia standing in its way.”

Use: Savage man-love

Lesson 2: How to address China’s senseless US hatred

Example: Delayed apology, delayed justice (People’s Daily)

“The founding principle of the United States is that all men are created equal, which has become a national faith and moral standard for the country to make propaganda and education in the world.”

Use: The wisdom of a young Will Smith

Lesson 3: How to respond to the nonstop douchery of China’s “rapid development”

Example: EVERY EDITORIAL EVER (Global Times, all)

Use: Dismissive wanking

Or, since there are so many, you might need this one as a backup:

(Note: I had to type “wanking gif” into google to get that. Just – just, ya know – don’t do that.)

Lesson 4: How to respond to matters concerning Japan

Example: Provocation by Japanese official over Diaoyu Islands detrimental to ties with China (Xinhua)

“Given the complex and sensitive nature of the issue, upon which the general atmosphere of China-Japan relations hinge, Japanese politicians at both central and local levels perhaps should exercise caution in their remarks and should not take any provocative moves.”

If you don’t give a damn, use George Takei prancing about

If you do give a damn, use crazy Japanese girl telling a bunch of bricks to eat a dick with her head

Lesson 5: How to deal with condescension and criticism about being a filthy uncivilized foreigner

Example: Cliches can’t reach foreign audiences (Global Times)

“When we talk to foreigners, if we simply apply the expressions we’re used to at home, they will be hard for foreigners to accept, which in turn hinders mutual understanding.”

Use: Offended gorilla

Lesson 6: How to deal with the Dalia Lama

Example: Hosting Dalai Lama must come at a high price (Global Times)

“China has become accustomed to paying the price for safeguarding its core interests. Now it should let Western countries make the choice: pay the price for meeting Dalai or avoid showing off their nobility of freedom.”

Use: Group facepalm

Or, use the llama that looks deep into your soul

There, six easy ways to be annoying in China using technology from 1987. This is definitely because it is relevant and not because I was way too busy to write a proper column this week. And, in gifworld, this is how we say goodbye.

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

By TAR Nation

First, KATO!

No, not that Kato. Yoshikazu Kato.

He’s a Japanese writer who has written for the Financial Times, Oriental Outlook and… and… The Global Times?!

You don’t know Yoshikazu? He’s the filthy Jap Devil who wants to steal/buy islands from the motherland. Maybe that’s why Global Times invited not one, not two, but three writers to hate on him in an editorial called “Japanese writer stirs up Nanjing storm.” What did he do to deserve this amount of loathing?

He spoke about China’s history.

The first and second rule of China is: YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT CHINA’S HISTORY.

More specifically, he said that he was “unsure of the facts” surrounding the Nanjing massacre. Okay. So am I, insofar as I’m not an academic on the subject. Obviously, I think it happened, otherwise I would be a conspiracy theorist and a cretin. The Rape of Nanjing is quite possibly the only historical event in the history of China that has been recorded correctly in the Chinese press.

Thing is, that was all Kato said — unsure of facts. Later, he somewhat detracted that statement on his Weibo, but added that people should “look at various channels for historical truth.”

Ah, silly, stupid Kato. Apart from prostrating himself and begging to be raped, there was pretty much no way to successfully backtrack.

So, he almost said something that was kinda indicative of something that might be controversial if he said it in the way that people supposed he did despite detracting the point…

Yeah, that’s worth a three-editorial response.

However, I will give the Global Times kudos on this one. They acted like the free press around the world, albeit the worst part of the free press (i.e. droning on about something of no consequence because it might be a little controversial).

Now that you’ve had your kudos, GT, brace yourself. Things are going to get ugly.

Next: UK, Norway are paying price for arrogance

This comes in the shape of Hu Xijin, our favorite mad Chinese newspaperman — assuming that the Global Times is, in fact, a newspaper and not something created by a cruel and unkind god to persecute literate mammals.

The editorial is in response to the Dalai Lama in the UK and Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel Prize, which remains all Norway’s fault. It opens by saying that these two countries are going to be punished.

What did fearsome China do?

“China has recently canceled several ministerial-level talks with the UK and denied a visa to former Norwegian Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik.”

So… granted Kjell Magne Bondevik a pardon from sure suffering? That’s what China did?

I tried to imagine what it would be like to be in “ministerial-level talks” with China, but then I got all dizzy and woke up with a strong desire to cut myself.

And man oh man did Kjell dodge a bullet. He was going to come to China? Fuck that. I live here. It’s rubbish. And, what’s worse, you’re not even allowed to say that it’s rubbish. Because if you say it to an expat, they’ll tell you how lucky you are and how there are so many opportunities and how you really need to go and talk to the everyday Chinese pe— WHY DON’T YOU ALL JUST GO TO HELL! Then, after you hit them, they get mad and tell you to go back to your own country if you don’t like it, as if you like or are welcome in your home country. My ideal place is on a tropical island that looks and feels like a boob, with air conditioning and good wifi. It’s a human right to be a misanthrope, and China is the only place where it’s illegal to be one in print.

But I digress.

Let’s have a little taste of GT’s madness:

They must pay the due price for their arrogance. This is also how China can build its authority in the international arena. China doesn’t need to make a big fuss because of the Dalai or a dissident, but it has many options to make the UK and Norway regret their decision.

Despite the fact that this sounds like a declaration of trade war from the party mouthpiece, it’s childish. It amounts to, “We don’t like him, so you can’t play with him or we won’t be friends anymore.” Then there is the veiled threat. The Chinese propaganda rags AND the far more reactionary CCP are actually, in this modern day and age, threatening developed countries for private awards ceremonies and choice of visitors. Norway? Really?

Continuing:

Studying the West has to take place under the condition of resisting its pressure, otherwise, it is to accept being conquered by the West.

A sentence so rife with inanity that, in response, I will just hit my head on the keyboard, thus:  y6vhub.

The speculation is probably correct. In both cases China’s core interests have been offended. Proper countermeasures are necessary for a big country. If China takes no action, it would be tantamount to tolerating a vicious provocation. This indifference would be despised at home and in the world.

Incorrect. “Home and the world” would probably just think you were an adult with a sense of decency and a functioning sense of proportion.

China-UK cooperation will have to be slowed down. Free trade agreement talks between China and Norway have also been upset. The ensuing loss is a small one for China.

If that’s not bullying, I don’t know what is. Seeing as how China’s top exports are:

1. Passive-aggressive threats.

2. Jackie Chan.

3. Dog food that kills them.

It’s not much of a threat. So, with due respect from forward-thinking people around the globe, you can stick all future free-trade agreements where the sun doesn’t shine (i.e. Beijing, Wukan, Datong, et al.).

It’s not easy to have Chinese society’s sympathy on China’s sovereignty issues. The West has presented various honors to Chinese dissidents, and Chinese people won’t be fooled into believing it is a simple coincidence.

Is that so? Because to be perfectly honest, to believe this shit every day for the past 60 years without beating the people responsible with sticks, my money is on the Chinese people being dumber than a peanut butter butt-plug. Then again, they obviously don’t have a choice. If the Global Times’s existence proves one thing, it’s, “You can fool some of the people all the time, all the people some of the time — and there’s not a goddamned thing they can do about it.”

Hope you enjoyed those kudos.

Also this week: National Human Rights Action Plan of China (2012-2015)

Basically, “China” informed China that they are absolutely and resolutely screwed for human rights for at least the next three years. The State Council of Irony issued a report stating that the Chinese government would do a grand total of fuck-all about human rights from 2012 to 2015. In this, they couldn’t help but take yet another passive-aggressive poke at countries with proper governments by patting themselves on the back that they are publishing the report at all, something other countries (“who point their finger at China”) don’t do. Just to make sure they got their point across, they published it in every newspaper and website that has a CPC phallus sticking out of it.

The major argument for not doing one of these reports is this report. It’s propaganda all the way through. It’s vague. And it’s insulting to anyone who has read a newspaper in the past 10 years.

Now, the report consisted of three things:

1. Things China is already supposed to be doing but can’t enforce.

2. Things China has absolutely no intention of doing.

3. Things China doesn’t mention.

Of the things not or barely mentioned were press freedoms and Internet freedoms (though they insultingly included attempts to widen Internet access — access, mind you, to one of the most highly regulated and censored forms of Internet in the world).

Now, those rights are pretty much the only things I care about. You can slaughter Tibetans until you’re blue in the face, but as long as there is press freedom and Internet freedom, you won’t hear a word of complaint from me about China’s “human rights” situation.

The reason it wasn’t mentioned is because this is the one human right that China’s government will never allow. Ever. The reason for this is that the CPC won’t be able to slaughter Tibetans or burn union organizers at the stake if there is a free press.

The irony, of course, is that this is the easiest one to fix. Just fuck off. That’s all. Easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy. Stop scaring people. Stop imprisoning journalists. Stop firing editors. Stop date-raping private publishers. Stop censoring the Internet. And, if you have time, publicly execute Hu Xijin in Tiananmen Square by hatching spiders in his brain. There. Done. How hard was that?

I know that China has a lot of other human rights problems, but this is the one I care about. If I were a lawyer, I’d care about rule of law. If I were a politician, I would care about political rights. If I were a monkey, I would care about the equal distribution of bananas. As it happens, I fancy myself a writer, which makes the CPC pretty much my greatest enemy.

The Chinese government thinks that human rights are a gift to be given to the Chinese people like a massage coupon. Out of that warped logic came excuses as to why China’s human rights situation sucks. Can you guess the main one? Yup, development. China doesn’t have human rights because of development. I can’t argue this point. It’s just that stupid. It’s like saying, “I don’t have any beans because of my sorcerer’s leg brace.”

All that said, this report is my favorite kind of propaganda. It’s the political equivalent of farting in an elevator right before it gets to your floor.

Other gems this week included: The Shenzhou-9 hype to the point where I hoped upon hope that it would crash and burn, Hu Jintao shaking hands with the hottest MILF to ever run a country, China brags about Rio despite pictures like this, the Guangming Daily actually published an article denying the China Containment Theory that Chinese propaganda rags are so fond of, Chinese “netizens” are worthless shite hawks, English.peopledaily.com.cn/opinion.html has not changed their homepage since July 2011 (now that’s some up-to-date-reporting), Syria is apparently evidence of the US’s need for a unipolar global order (like the US wants anything to do with you filthy gibberish-talking metric-lovers), calling the Australians cowards, a pathetic attempt from a conspiracy theorist to equate modern political drama with the Sykes-Picot, and what week in Chinese editorials would be complete without taking a long wet poop on the US?

By TAR Nation

A lot of things happened this week, from the Tiananmen anniversary to the death of dissidents to Tibetans setting themselves on fire. Predictably, the Chinese papers stayed away from these subjects entirely. What did they focus on instead? The Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

Featuring: China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

I’m pretty sure at least one of those countries is made up. One of them begins with eight consonants. The amount of points you can get at Scrabble with them is higher than their GDP, which is terrible because you can’t use proper nouns in Scrabble.

Here is what the representatives looked like at the recent summit in Beijing:

I don’t mean to take the piss out of those countries, but c’mon; the SCO is like a bad-ass gang of bingo hall squatters. There are other observer states, but these are the main guys.

Despite the fact that the Shanghai Cooperation Organization sounds like an NGO for the mentally disabled, it is apparently, at least to China, a big deal.

Judging from the party line rags, three major things were decided:

1. China and Russia are awesome.

2. The UN is not awesome.

3. The SCO is not NATO.

The editorials all say the same things: “SCO is great,” “Hearken to the word of the SCO,” “All praise be unto the SCO.” But there was one that was, “THE SCO IS NOT NATO, STUPID COLD WAR-MINDED WESTERNERS! HA! YOU ARE SILLY FOREIGN DEVILS!” (A Global Times piece, as you might imagine). Other editorials more gracefully broached this topic, all centering around the assumption that China is something entirely new, shat forth from the harmonious womb of a resplendent golden and auspicious socialist vagina, making it entirely unfit for foreigners to comment upon.

But they’re right on one front: it isn’t NATO.

Then again, no one accused them of being NATO.

The party-line rags went on, at great length, mind you, about how the evil, evil, evil Western media had accused them of being a counterbalance to NATO. But the only “Western media” articles that implied this before the Chinese editorials were this, in the Hindustan Times, this, in the Russia and India Report, and this, in the Indian Express, largely because of India’s “observer” role in the organization with a view to taking a more active part.

So why did the propaganda rags publish editorials about this? I — haven’t a fucking clue.

What we have here is China having an argument… that it started… with itself.

The Global Times said this: “The Western media is full of comments about the SCO’s confrontation with the US and NATO. It was even called an eastern NATO by some media. This reflects a Cold War mentality and narrow-mindedness.”

That’s right. I had to use an owl to express my incredulity. Not a word of that lead was even close to being correct. Exactly how narrow-minded were they when the US offered to join as an “observer” in 2006? This week, they accepted Afghanistan as an observer. Afghanistan. THAT is a snub, which will undoubtedly be followed by, well, this sort of banality. Obviously, it is an area-specific organization, and the US shouldn’t have really expected to have a seat. But they even let the President of Iran, Mahmoud AhMcCrazyPants, be an observer and make a speech where he said crazy things like a crazy man. He’s crazy.

Now that the summit is over, there are a few foreign policy geeks (the worst kind of geeks) pontificating about how the two should seek an active role with each other, and, since then, a few articles about the militarization of the SCO have reared their heads, largely citing the Chinese editorial insistence as evidence. It’s more of an isn’t-this-interesting kinda thing, rather than a cower-and-run-because-the-Chinamen-are-coming kinda thing.

The articles that can be found, now and back in the day, don’t exactly equate the SCO to a “counterbalance to NATO,” but rather a “counterbalance to the international ideals of democratic governance.” They may have a point there. Basically, if you’re an authoritarian dictator, you’ve got a friend in China.

Most of the actual members are part of the “Supposedly-a-Democracy Bowling Team,” and each have their own individual and varied troubles. But when you go off and google their human rights violations, just Ctrl+F for “intimidation” and “cruelty.” Also, most of them show up as pretty grim colors on the Reporters Without Boarders map of press freedoms.

The organization, when not discussing relatively impressive investment techniques, is pretty much only concerned with their own sovereignty and safety. As Xinhua said, “Despite the remarkable achievements attained by the SCO, the region still faces grim challenges from ‘the three evil forces’ of terrorism, extremism and separatism.”

All of those things sound bad until you realize that “extremism” means human rights and free press, that “separatism” means Taiwan and Tibet, and that “terrorism” means protestors.

I don’t think people should just arbitrarily make up “three evil forces,” especially ones that aren’t that scary. I say the three evil forces are lung cancer, flesh-eating robots and wasps.

As such, the SCO issued a statement saying that they were against “interventionism.” Well, they would be, wouldn’t they? There are a whole lot of under-informed people in their country that want to kick their ass, but they suffer from the birth defect of not being born with a tank. This has been an ongoing theme in Chinese newspapers for a while. They tell the world that it’s morally reprehensible to stand up to authoritarian governments, and then they taunt the world. It’s a fun little game. And by fun little game, I mean frustrating merry-go-round of goading fuckery.

Or, as said in one “news” piece from China’s Vice Foreign Minister, vying for most passive-aggressive statement of the year: “We strongly oppose some countries intervene in other countries’ internal affairs.”

We know, sweetie. Now go and play in the garden for awhile.

Mostly, people with a free press in their country don’t even know what the SCO is. I asked five such friends. Two of them thought it was a band, two others thought it was a food and one thought it was a professional wrestling maneuver.

Mainly, it’s a meeting where everyone can talk about how great the meeting is:

SCO becomes influential int’l group: Kyrgyz president

SCO principles create new model of international relations: Russian expert

It’s shameless back-pattery equal to:

Aerosmith is great: Steven Tyler

The most annoying thing about this editorial onslaught is that it and other hackneyed subjects displaced the Tiananmen massacre. I was looking forward to the editorials calmly explaining how there is too much political fundamentalism and how the Western media are liars and opportunists working for a robot Ronald Reagan, but they weren’t there. China is a country that talks endlessly about the anniversary of every little thing in lieu of proper media organizations. They celebrate Nixon’s visit, for christ’s sake! Global Times ran not one, but two politically motivated editorials on Nixon’s visit back in February. Why on earth would they celebrate the arrival of an antagonistic, thieving, conspiratorial, paranoid – oh, wait. I see it now.

But they can’t be bothered to write at least a passing word regarding the time that hundreds were massacred near the Muxidi subway station, a time when nine people in Shanghai were run over by a stampeding train trying to make it through protestors’ barricades, when students in Wuhan poured gasoline on a moving train but were stopped right before they lit the match, when people in Nanjing took over bus stations, railway stations and highways.

No. We get this:

Which, in just six short years, evolved from this:

That’s right. Back in 2006, these guys were so bad ass that they didn’t even cast shadows. Not only have most of the leaders of these countries not changed, but some of them are still wearing the same suits. Others continue to look like characters from The Sims, albeit less photoshopped.

We’ll finish up on the SCO with a quote from our favorite newspaper editor, Hu Xijin at Global Times:

Everything appears to be a challenge in the eyes of American elites who are showing a hegemonic fragility… Perhaps the idea of old-style big powers clashing throughout history is so deeply ingrained that any concept other than that of inevitable conflict is heterodoxy to them.

That’s it for now. Other items this week included: Taiwan definitely being part of China, China and Russia being the bestest friends ever, gaokao boobery, blaming the Western media for the Houla massacre, yet more banging on about the human rights report, how ancient Chinese socialist recipe can cure EU’s debt problem, China’s rise is rising to rise risiness of China’s rise rising and air.

|To Serve People Archives|

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

By TAR Nation

So… Confucius, huh?

What a douche.

Just kidding. We’re cool, dog. *imaginary 4^th Century BC fist bump*

But the Confucius Institute has been at the center of a Chinese editorial free-for-all for a good part of the week. So who is the party-line hate focused at this week? Dalai Lama? Rabiya Kadeer? Democracy? Ai Weiwei? Free Press? Foreigners? Hollywood? The Internet?

Ah, here it is: the good ol’ US of A.

Here’s what happened.

A memorandum was released on May 17 regarding Confucius Institutes in what looks like a helpful reminder and directive to get all foreign nationals under the proper visa requirements:

Blah, blah, legal stuff, blah.

Then the Chronicle of Higher Education (pro-Confucius Institute for some reason, particularly one Karin Fischer) published on May 21, four days later, how this might be a problem for Confucius Institutes and how it may even lead to some teachers not being able to get the proper visas. Karin say, “University-affiliated Confucius Institute teachers who were offering instruction to students below the college level through public outreach programs are not under the proper visa to do so.” Right. Basically, teachers in this arena are not allowed to teach K-12, something that frequently happens in Confucius Institutes. Those doing it are technically in violation of their visa and would need to go back to China to get the correct visa. Whoopdee goddamn doo. Also, some visas were cancelled in China for teachers ready to come to the US because they didn’t have the correct visa anymore. Not the end of the world, really, but it led to rumors.

Despite countless attempts to explain that this directive was not an attempt to disrupt Confucius Institutes or their visa holders but was rather a clarification on previous standards, the Chronicle of Higher Education still had a rhododendron-headed editor who decided, as early as May 22, to run this follow-up: “State Department Denies Targeting Confucius Institutes but Holds to Decision on Visas.”

So in summary: what started this mess was an organization, the Chronicle of Higher Education, overreaching their brief and reporting that the US was targeting Confucius Institutes for a visa holocaust, then fanning those flames by reporting their error (without mentioning said error) vis-a-vis the State Department.

Another problem was accreditation of the Confucius Institutes themselves, which is really an aside considering that the 80-plus universities in the US with these institutes maintain them for no other purpose than a quick pay check. In short, they’re in no danger. The schools will get them their accreditation the same way they got theirs. Cash.

None of this is important anymore. The directive, while I was writing this, mind you, has been amended to make everyone happy, and these institutes do NOT need separate accreditation.

But, ah, the Chinese editorial monster had been roused. This happened: on May 24, Hong Kong’s Sing Tao Daily seems to have gotten the ball rolling on the snowman from hell, resulting in a media blitz on the USA. I’ve never seen one so well orchestrated or poorly informed.

Earlier that very day, Victoria Nuland from the State Department clarified that, “This is also not about the Confucius Institutes themselves. It is simply about whether the right visa status was applied in these cases.” She also assuaged fears by saying, “And there was some muddling and messing up, so – in these cases – so we’re going to sort these out. Nobody’s going to have to leave the country. It’s all going to get cleared up. But there was some confusion on the front end, so we’re going to fix it.”

The statement was calm and reasonable, but it was too late. Of course, it wasn’t late at all — it was just heard by state media polemicists who had no use for it anymore.

Let’s take a look at the propaganda machine’s attack:

China Daily: US action self defeating: “Some in the US have a lingering Cold War mentality and allege the Confucius Institutes will corrupt American minds.”

Global Times: Why is Washington so scared of Confucius: “The issue shows that the US’ cultural confidence is not as strong as we thought.” And: “Only culturally weak countries have such sensitivity.” Really? Really, God-king of all inferiority complexes that is China, that’s what you think?

Global Times: US directive confuses Confucius Institutes: So confusing that I stopped understanding it after a while.

Global Times: Confucius ban harms ties: I find this one particularly funny because China has been the only country in the history of earth to “ban” Confucius.

People’s Daily: New visa policy sets barriers for Confucius Institutes in US: “Political forces make constant attempts to tarnish the image of the Confucius Institutes…. Certain U.S. political forces have long been groundlessly criticizing Confucius Institutes, and made constant attempts to tarnish the image of Confucius Institutes…. U.S. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher accused China of spreading its propaganda by exploiting private media and public education.”

Let’s consider that last part of Rohrabacher’s quote, shall we? The big man himself, Li Changchun, China’s propaganda chief, has been quoted in USA Today referring to Confucius Institutes as “an important part of China’s overseas propaganda setup.”

In consideration of this, we need to begin — as always — with accusations of censorship. Good ol’ Peng Meng wrote in Taipei Times, “Colleges and universities where a Confucius Institute is established all have to sign a contract in which they declare their support for Beijing’s ‘One-China’ policy. As a result, both Taiwan and Tibet have become taboos at these institutes.” The issue regarding the One-China Policy was further confirmed by a University of Oregon professor but has yet to be independently confirmed. Peng went on to mention other China taboos including human rights, Tiananmen Square and even pollution in China.

Well, when Peng went to give a lecture at the University of Oregon in 2010, guess what? The university was pressured by the CHINESE CONSUL GENERAL to not let him speak (thankfully, they failed).

In 2011, according to Bloomberg, a hiring notice at CI stated that teachers must be “aged between 22 to 60, physical and mental healthy, no record of participation in Falun Gong and other illegal organizations, and no criminal record.” From the same source, the University of Chicago had over 170 faculty members protesting against the Confucius Institute at their university. Stanford’s dean of humanities said their $4 million investment came with a caveat that professors could not discuss sensitive issues like Tibet (Stanford refused the deal, humiliating the institute, which backed down and wound up funding the school anyway). In 2009, North Carolina University cancelled a trip to see the Dalai Lama due to possible conflicts with the CI. (It should be noted that Miami University in Ohio and Stanford both accepted the Dalai Lama despite the “trouble”).

There have also been claims that having a CI in your university may lead to problems with liberals getting visas, such as what happened to Andrew J. Nathan and his Modern Tibetan Studies Program.

And anyone who has ever worked for the Chinese media will tell you that actual censorship is not the biggest problem. It’s self-censorship, or as China calls it, soft power. But hey, if they want to try to teach the average American that free press is a bad thing and that the Dalai Lama eats babies, be my guest. Hell, you can’t even convince a great many Americans about evolution — they’re dumb as bricks. But not dumb enough for this bull honkey.

Out of concerns like these, Confucius Institutes have been driven out of universities in Pennsylvania, Melbourne, Stockholm (for espionage concerns which were largely groundless), and Tel Aviv.

So, not your typical language school, is it?

Seeing as how the only benefit for universities to hosting Confucius Institutes is money, I’d be a little wary of them, too.

“By peddling a product we want, namely Chinese language study, the Confucius Institutes bring the Chinese government into the American academy in powerful ways,” Chinese history professor Jonathan Lipman told Bloomberg. “The general pattern is very clear. They can say, ‘We’ll give you this money, you’ll have a Chinese program, and nobody will talk about Tibet.’ In this economy, turning them down has real costs.”

And what is the point of these CIs? In GT’s “Why is Washington so scared of Confucius” op-ed, the editors write, “When a country’s economy develops, it will care about respect from other countries. The Chinese are clear that the establishment of a country’s soft power is difficult.”

Basically, the Chinese government says it just wants to put in the tip. But we all know it’s going to end up in shafting, followed by next-morning embarrassment.

Honestly, the institutes themselves are pretty tame. They’ve been accused of a great deal, but they know upon which side their bread is buttered. Here’s the thing though: this week, in pulling out their trump card, they showed to the world that the full might of the Chinese propaganda machine is behind them. This seems like an important consideration for universities. Sure, the Confucius Institutes may be harmless, but can anyone be completely clean when they have a blood-stained guard panda begging for an excuse to kick down your door?

The Chinese government is very good at bullying. I’m willing to bet that, at this very moment, a dozen editorials slamming the American government for its Human Rights Report that was released on Friday is sitting on copyeditors’ desks, blissfully ignorant to the fact that people’s inability to comment on the report in the press is, in fact, a minor but important violation of human rights. They’ll call Americans biased, self-obsessed and ignorant. How do I know this? Because they do it every year, along with their own laughable Human Rights Report on America. The editorial writers are told what to write about, make no mistake. I’ve seen it. I’ve seen it this week. I’ve seen it with my eyeballs and heard it with my ear balls. This Confucius Institute scandal is no different.

It does seem that the CPC’s view of Confucius has changed over the years. During the Cultural Revolution, the Confucius masterpiece The Analects was banned, and Confucian scholars were tortured and shamed. Red Guards took over Confucian temples, defaced statues, and chanted, “Down with Confucius, down with his wife!” (Which seems a bit harsh. What’s the wife got to do with anything?) Then, Confucius was branded a “class enemy” in a “Criticize Confucius” campaign. That’s right; they had a campaign against an Iron Age dead guy. The graves of the Kong family were trashed and looted. Corpses were dug up from their graves at the Kong family cemetery and hung from trees. Red Guards also dug up Confucius’ grave to show that it was empty.

(Psssst… hey, Chinese people… hey… these guys run your country now.)

And now they worship the man, and they get to write about how they convinced the US to do so as well.

Xinhua, 5/26, 11:21:37: U.S. amends directive on Confucius Institutes to fix mess-up

Xinhua, 5/26, 19:08:56: US Reverses directive on Confucius Institutes (“Immigration attorney Liang Ping says pressure from Beijing and concerned Universities seems to have worked.”)

China Daily, 5/26, 07:52: US tries to clear up confusion over institutes

The USA and China have their differences, but they don’t encourage people to run headlong into conflict and extinction.

I… I’m sure that everyone…

…will just get on with it and try to make the… world… a better…

…place and keep a… level head about…

…you know…

Dude?! Is that General MacArthur stabbing a baby?

Seriously?

Everyone got all pissy this week after the 100 Day Campaign in Beijing to wipe out filthy foreigners and Yang Rui’s comments that make you want to stab a kitten with a fork, but, really, what do you expect? I mean, sure, America, the West, and everywhere in the world has had racist propaganda campaigns during wartime, and I’m sure that some of those prejudices linger in everyday life even today. But I can’t imagine how I would feel about foreigners if they were painted as complete devils my entire lifetime, up to and including today, by everyone in authority. Imagine if you grew up in a world where the only acceptable opinion was the Global Times opinion, where having a different one and expressing it in public meant big trouble. I’d be burning effigies of Chen Guangcheng faster than you can say “serve the people.”

The US and every other country that has been at the business end of a propaganda rag seeing-to is supposed to forget about these insults without so much as an apology, and when the smoke clears they have to pretend there’s a Sino-anyone friendship. I knew bullies like this at school. They’re not friends. They’re just people waiting for an excuse to bottle that smug git.

The upside of all this is that the more the Chinese government talks to the world, the more respect they lose, so, I say, bring on the Confucius Institutes, regardless of the endless strings and propaganda guard panda.

If they’re able to convince a significant number of people in the world with access to a proper Internet of the CPC view on international politics, I’ll put a leech on my dong.

We’ll end with an actual quote from Confucius that touches upon the CPC’s development ego:

When a country is well governed, poverty and anger are something to be ashamed of. When a country is ill governed, riches and honors are something to be ashamed of.

I’m starting to see why he was banned.

|To Serve People Archives|