Bears repeating---BUMP!
Posted on 10/14/2004 12:58:10 PM PDT by LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget
BEIJING, Oct 14 (AFP) - If Chinese could vote in the US presidential election they would overwhelmingly support Democrat challenger John Kerry, but China's authoritarian leaders prefer the methods of incumbent George W. Bush, analysts said.
"The majority of Chinese will consider a win by John Kerry favorably," said Zhu Feng, an expert on Sino-US relations at Beijing University's International Studies Institute.
"They consider that Bush's policy choices have been too simplistically focused on US interests, that the Bush administration has had a bad foreign policy and his personal performance has been poor."
Chinese people are distressed by the Iraq war and concerned about US weapons sales to Taiwan, he said.
"But among Chinese scholars there has been a hard debate in policy circles," Zhu told AFP.
"The prevailing view is that if Bush is re-elected there will be stability in the US-China relationship which will be favorable to the future of bilateral relations."
Beijing watched relations with Washington relax considerably after it agreed to support the Bush administration in its war on terror and has worked hard to get Bush to at least voice compliance with China's "one China policy" on Taiwan, he said.
"These people (in policy circles) think the Bush administration may not be the best for advancing China relations, but it is not the worst," Zhu added.
According to Jin Canrong, a scholar at the US Institute of the China Academy of Social Sciences, the main position of the Chinese government on the US election is to avoid allowing China-related issues becoming fodder for partisan US politics.
"The official stance is of keeping neutral," Jin told AFP.
"China doesn't want to be so silly as to become involved in partisan politics. The policy difference on China between the two sides is not that significant so it is clever to remain silent."
That said, many Chinese leaders are happy with the cooperation between Beijing and Washington on terrorism, while the US administration has shown a willingness to reduce the "contradictions" over its policy on Taiwan, he said.
"Up to now, the dominant opinion has been that there has been good cooperation in the anti-terrorism fight with the US and that this cooperation is in China's interests as China," Jin said.
"China's problem is that the US states its support for the 'one China policy', but then it goes ahead with a policy of arms sales to Taiwan. China hopes that the US can reduce this contradiction and stabilize the situation."
China views Taiwan as the most important issue in Sino-US relations and has repeatedly threatened to use force to reunite the island, which it regards as a rogue province, if Taiwan formally declares independence or if "hostile foreign forces" interfere.
"No matter who wins the election, the development trend of Sino-US relations will not change. Both the Republicans and the Democrats share common ground on China policy," Ruan Zongze, vice director of the Foreign Ministry-run China Institute of International Studies, told AFP.
But if the US wants to stabilize the situation in the Middle East and Iraq, then the international community will have to be involved and Kerry might make a better choice, he said.
"There is already an argument going on inside the US on this with the Bush administration being criticized for its unilateral stance, while Kerry says he wants to develop alliances," Ruan said.
"This means the UN must do a better job to fulfill its role because if there is no global order, then everyone will want to take the unilateral approach, which will become a challenge to international law and order and could destroy the basis for international cooperation."
This is the politbureau hedging their bet on Kerry, and
trying to undo their obvious preference for him.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/3800.shtml
I still haven't heard who the Kerry Centre Hotel
in Beijing is named for, and those who know there
aren't willing to discuss it. Might be a coincidence.
I wonder if they were happy with Bill Clinton?
Who the hell knows what the Chinese people think? They think Bush's foreign policy is "too simplistically" geared to US interests? Ya, right. The average Chinese peasant has no clue who Bush even is, I bet. I doubt he could mention one thing Bush has done in foreign policy.
This sounds like a pointy headed intellectual attributing his views to people who cannot easily correct him.
You mean the guy who bombed their Serbian embassy?
"The prevailing view is that if Bush is re-elected there will be stability in the US-China relationship which will be favorable to the future of bilateral relations."
Even the ChiComs recognize that Kerry is a flake, which also explains why the terrorists like him so much.
AFP (agence france presse) presents no evidence at all in the article for the headline and lead, ie. that the Chinese people favor kerry. Not that the Chinese people can voice such opinions freely -- they can't. So even if figures from a public opinion poll were cited, those figures would be suspect. This is typical of AFP -- stating a claim as fact in the headline and lead, then offering no factual support in the body of the story.
AFP (agence france presse) presents no evidence at all in the article for the headline and lead, ie. that the Chinese people favor kerry. Not that the Chinese people can voice such opinions freely -- they can't. So even if figures from a public opinion poll were cited, those figures would be suspect. This is typical of AFP -- stating a claim as fact in the headline and lead, then offering no factual support in the body of the story.
They support Kerry in just the way that they supported Clinton in the 1990s. We have Chinese friends living here who came here from Beijing. They are learning to love our democratic systems, although it's taken a while. But they react vicerally to both Clinton and Bush. They can't stand Pres. Bush and really, really like Clinton, which they seem to have transferred to Kerry. It's obvious to us that they were basically programmed to think "Clinton good"; "Bush bad" while in China. Their dislike of Bush was obviously later (2000) and we've found it surprising since the husband has been here longer than that. We think he must be in touch with his friends over there and is picking that up. It just seems to be second nature and not coming from reason and logic after looking at the candidates and what they stand for.
The socialist influence?
I'm not sure. Our friends are definately not pro-communists. Their parents are and they don't understand it. They thought the first political campaign they saw here the most disrespecful thing they'd ever witnessed. But after they thought about it, they realized how wonderful it is for the voters, even with all its warts. For all that, however, they just shudder at the thought of Bush and favor Kerry. My guess is that they've been taught that Bush is a war-monger and Kerry is for peace. To be extremely intelligent and thoughtful people, this is one of the few areas where they just seem to react instead of thinking the issue through.
Even if they DID prefer Bush, Saddam, Osama, Vicente Fox, Al Zakawi, Al Quaida, etc. support KERRY.
Hard to tell... Maybe religious? Or they fear the immigration cops?
This is just getting too weird for me.
Now, we are supposed to consider the viewpoints of citizens in a society where all information is strictly controlled by the government.
Nothing in this article is credible. "Agence France-Presse" is the mouthpiece of the the French government. The French government's close alignment with the neo-Fascist (nee Communist) mainland Chinese government has not been limited to the halls of the United Nations. Earlier this year, when the democratic people of Taiwan were conducting an election, the mainland thugs conducted a massive naval military exercise in the Straits of Taiwan. France sent it's navy to join China's navy in this attempt to intimidate the democratic people of Taiwan.
THIS FRENCH CRAP CAN'T BE PASSED OFF AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN ENEMY PSYOPS!
The Chicoms don't like unpredictability. They might not like what Bush does, but at least they know where he stands.
Kerry was part of a trade delegation to China in the late 90's that favored amongst other issues..."outsourcing to china"!
Consider the sources here....
I suspect that the media techniques that the MSM uses to condition the populace to accept the liberal point of view may have a stronger affect on immigrants from socialist regimes. The media in those countries has a strong propagandizing effect on the populace from cradle to grave and those who immigrate here may fall into that gullible pattern when subjected to the same propagandizing effects from our media.
Another words immigrants from China are more psychologically keyed to accept propaganda as truth from MSM sources as they are not experienced in differential examination of news from a broad spectrum of sources. This broad spectrum would not have been as readily available in China or severely suppressed, so the only news would come from official sources as approved by the "peoples revolutionary government". Even those Chinese that have learned to see thru the lies of their own government and have come here may still be vulnerable to propaganda from the Liberal press.
The theory is this, our press is "free" and they say bad things about Bush. This means the free press must be telling the truth about Bush because why would a free press have to lie about any-thing? The techniques employed by our "free press" often mimic the techniques used by the media sensors in China, so even "protest" immigrants would still be psychologically vulnerable to manipulation by our "free media"! There-fore Bush is bad and Kerry is good!
(sorry, here's a better fromat of my reply)
I suspect that the media techniques that the MSM uses to condition the populace to accept the liberal point of view may have a stronger affect on immigrants from socialist regimes. The media in those countries has a strong propagandizing effect on the populace from cradle to grave and those who immigrate here may fall into that gullible pattern when subjected to the same propagandizing effects from our media.
Another words immigrants from China are more psychologically keyed to accept propaganda as truth from MSM sources as they are not experienced in differential examination of news from a broad spectrum of sources. This broad spectrum would not have been as readily available in China or severely suppressed, so the only news would come from official sources as approved by the "peoples revolutionary government". Even those Chinese that have learned to see thru the lies of their own government and have come here may still be vulnerable to propaganda from the Liberal press.
The theory is this, our press is "free" and they say bad things about Bush. This means the free press must be telling the truth about Bush because why would a free press have to lie about any-thing? The techniques employed by our "free press" often mimic the techniques used by the media sensors in China, so even "protest" immigrants would still be psychologically vulnerable to manipulation by our "free media"! There-fore Bush is bad and Kerry is good!
And there you have it. The Chinese leaders are not committed communists, they are committed tyrants. Communism is just a handy system for maintaining control. Any shift in the American political landscape forces the Chinese to reposition themselves on issues ranging from commerce to Taiwan. It's hard to adapt your policies to a changing foreign foe when you're concentrating on oppressing a billion people.
If you define the political spectrum as being total government at one end of the scale and total anarchy at the other there is very little difference between Facism, Stalinism, Maoism and fanatical Islam. What does it matter whose boot is on your throat?
Well, here is a clue. Most of those who participate at the following forum are Communist Red Chinese and so called "Overseas Chinese" folks, and many of them appear to be "international businessmen:"
http://www.asiawind.com/forums/list.php?f=3
They hate Bush and at times, post things at that site that are very hateful and inimical to the USA and the West. Some of it is pan-Sinic racism and genocidal thought. Oh, and by the way, the server just happens to be located in Columbus, OH.
Bears repeating---BUMP!
Coulda saved em alot of ink.
Now how would the Chinese people know anything about Kerry except through the Communist-owned newspapers and television?
Check this sample opinion from Asia Wind out:
China will be number one
Author: Li333
Date: 10-14-04 09:13
According to the 1992 CIA factbook, the real GNP of China in terms of purchasing power parity was already one half of the GNP of America back in 1992.
Since 1992, the GNP of China has tripled, it is now 3 times bigger than in 1992, whereas the GNP of America has only increased by one third since 1992.
In other words, the real GNP of China in terms of purchasing power parity is already bigger than the GNP of America.
Actually, the real GNP of China overtook the GNP of America in 2002.
Now, when the GNP of Japan overtook the GNP of Germany in 1968, every newspaper published the news around the world.
How come that, in 2002, when the GNP of China overtook the GNP of America, no newspapers published the news around the world? Why the discrimination against China?
By 2010, the real GNP of China will be 2 times bigger than the GNP of America.
By 2020, the real GNP of China will be 4 times bigger than the GNP of America.
By 2030, the real GNP of China will be 6 times bigger than the GNP of America, and the income per capita, the GNP per capita in China will be higher than the GNP per capita in America. In other words, Chinese incomes and wages will be higher than American wages in 2030, just as Japanese wages are already higher than American wages today.
By 2030, the average Chinese will be more wealthy and better educated than the average American.
China will be 5 or 6 times bigger and stronger than America very soon, and the world will have to stop looking down upon the Chinese people.
We can predict a future world where China will dominate financially, economically, militarily, in science and technology, culturally, with the Chinese language replacing the English language as the most important international language, with school kids in America learning Chinese as a foreign language ( and Chinese kids in China not needing to learn English anymore, since the American kids will know how to speak Chinese anyway ), with China dominating the world of media and entertainment, with Chinese movies, Chinese music and Chinese fashion designs spreading Chinese influence all over the world.
China will be number one.
I think that pan-national movements are a serious threat and I wonder how much DHS and the FBI have seriously investigated them, per se? Between the pan-Sinic, pan-Jihadi, pan-latino, and even (I know I'll probably get flamed for this one but relax everyone, for I am of the following ethnic origins!) pan-slavic movements, there are plenty of ways they could be undermining our country as well as aiding and abetting the terrorists. Furthermore, I believe that the US and Western Left have well realized the value of such movements in their master plans and have either courted them outright, or, learned how to manipulate them to meet their own objectives.
Most in the US, no offense, don't know all that much about pan movements because we never really had them here prior to the late 20th century (the various immigrant oriented groups in earlier times were insignificant and not true pan movements). Whereas, in Europe and Asia, they have been a problem for a long, long time. I think we, on the whole, are fairly naive to the dangers they bring. What are the pan movements doing, for example, in this election? What role are they playing in physical attacks on GOPers and our 1st Ammendment rights? What role are they playing in vote fraud? Does anyone, particularly the FBI and DHS, know the answers to these questions? If not, they better find them out right quick! Must reading on this topic is "The Origins of Totalitarianism" by Hannah Arendt.
AFP's motives are plain as day, aren't they?
Masses of ordinary Chinese people, longing to be free, like kerry.
It's true because we say it's true and you should care because Americans need a "permission slip" from foreign countries (especially communist slave states) before they can choose their own leader.
How much of his income will the average Chinese get to keep?
What will the tax schedule look like?
How will China feed itself if it moves its massive peasant population into the urban areas where it can apply all of its newly acquired white-collar skills?
How much will these phenomenally well-educated Chinese know about free market economy, sanctity of private property, individual rights -- all those things upon which prosperity depends?
Just curious, Paul...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.