Joe Biden’s nominee for ambassador to China Nicholas Burns continue fake news propaganda at a confirmation hearing on Wed, citing its “genocide in Xinjiang” and Taiwan to insult and demonize China dug his own grave before arriving in China. 拜登提名的駐華大使尼古拉斯·伯恩斯在周三的確認聽證會上繼續進行虛假新聞宣傳，稱其“新疆種族滅絕”和台灣謊言侮辱和妖魔化中國，在抵達中國之前自掘墳墓.
Biden will defend Taiwan if attacked just like US have done in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Korea, Taiwan no need worry!?
Video: Myanmar – ASEAN Non-Interference Principles at Risk Amid US-Backed Regime Change Campaign 緬甸 – 東盟不干涉原則在美國支持的政權更迭運動中面臨風險
https://youtu.be/9XYHHAeLRGA
https://vimeo.com/637678480
https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/589714278918568/?d=n
ASEAN – a loose alliance of Southeast Asian nations – has been pressured to interfere in Myanmar’s internal political crisis. Justifying the violation of ASEAN’s non-interference principles requires ignoring US interference in Myanmar and the atrocities carried out by the US-backed opposition.
I am confident to say after 50 years of experience what Simon Gan talk about apply to most of the AngloSaxon world especially USA, Canada, Australia and UK that people of color are not welcome, especially Chinese. 大部分盎格魯撒克遜(白人)世界，尤其是美國、加拿大、澳大利亞和英國，我個人的50年經歷有信心地說，有色人種是不受歡迎的，尤其是中國人.
Simon Gan: I am a Chinese born in Malaysia & since 31 years ago is holding a Dutch passport. Since the racial riot in May 13, 1969 when leaning to drive with my driving instructor at that day & for the 1st time in my 21 years heard him yelled Pai Wha in Cantonese meaning racial riot, I begin to realised that Malaysia is only good for the Malay & Muslim. I took the risk & left Malaysia in 1973 leaving behind my very wonderful & happy life. I loved my adopted country very very much & host or lower the Dutch flag 4 or 5 times yearly something which I never felt to do in Malaysia but never forget that I am a Chinese in heart. I went to trace my roots to Hokkien in China 13 years ago & brought back our family’s heritage book. Lots of foreign born Chinese are banana Chinese esp. American Chinese who are brainwashed by western propaganda. I have from time to time to remind my son that he is foremost a Chinese who feel he is 100 % Dutch.
Video: A harmonious and robust Xizang in numbers 和諧強健的中國西藏 by Global Times, Oct 21 2021
https://vimeo.com/637651693
https://youtu.be/WS8hZn0h4_4
https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/589671002256229/?d=n
Video: Austrian talks to over 100 HK Protestors. What he finds is SHOCKING. They actually do not support democracy nor they read HK homeland security law 奧地利人與 100 多名香港抗議者會談. 他所發現是令人震驚的, 香港抗議者並不支持民主也從未閲讀過香港國安法.
https://youtu.be/zYK-cC9mw6c
In this episode of SOFTtalk, we speak to Lasse Boysen from Vienna, who founded his own NGO aiming to strengthen mutual understanding between Europe and China, and delve deep into the problems which Hong Kong has been facing over the past few years and how we should move forward as a city into the future.
*Disclaimer: Views expressed by guests are their own and their appearance on this program does not imply an endorsement of them.
0:00 Trailer
1:24 Introduction
2:23 Hong Kong 2019-now
9:33 Austrian View on Hong Kong National Security Law
13:01 Conclusion and Channel Update
Video: Why China not afraid to talk Democracy! Democracy is not only voting rights. There are different forms of Democracy. Democracy not equal to politicians doing all the BS during election. After election voters are ignored (except those with lots of money). This kind of money Democracy is not Democracy.
https://vimeo.com/637348234
https://youtu.be/yaWlt3Sg3Yg
https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/589261075630555/?d=n
時事觀察 第1節 霍詠強 ：中國為什麼敢講民主？ 民主不是投票權, 實現民主有多種方式, 不是千遍一律, 祇有競選時聆聽天花亂墜的口號, 競選後金主才有發言權, 這樣的金錢民主不是眞正的民主.
上星期中國國家主席習近平出席了中央人大工作會議，並就「全過程人民民主」發表了講話，在講述有關內容之前，先要説説台灣媒體的反應。不難想像這些評論就是嘲諷，他們無法理解習近平口説到中國的民主制度，於是有兩個主要的反應：
這些反應表明台灣媒體和台灣人被洗腦的程度是很嚴重的，對於政治制度、對於民主的認知，就等同選舉就是要叫口號，結婚就要買鑽石戒指一樣，甚至仍然以為地球是宇宙的中心。台灣人想要選擇的民主，是要選出一個可以任意批評和嘲笑的人物，而不是一個能夠帶領人民向前邁進的人物，這也是台灣自從開啟選舉和政黨輪替以來，社會民生幾無寸進的關鍵。然而，台灣人仍然不幸地相信，能夠批評領袖就是民主。
所以，他們並不明白「民主」，眼中以為是最基本的民主概念，只關心到習近平提及到「投票權」，就一頭熱地以為這也是他對民主闡釋的關鍵之處，然而習真正指出的，正正是台灣以及大部分選舉民主的問題：「民主不是裝飾品，不是用來做擺設的，而是要用來解決人民需要解決的問題的。如果人民只有在投票時被喚醒、投票後就進入休眠期，只有競選時聆聽天花亂墜的口號、競選後就毫無發言權，只有拉票時受寵、選舉後就被冷落，這樣的民主不是真正的民主。」
只要客觀地評價台灣的選舉文化，應該充分了解台灣正正陷入這種困境當中，民主變成裝飾品，選舉只有口號而缺乏實務，選舉承諾變成了虛偽的包裝和扭曲的藉口，正如民進黨在重奪高雄執政權時，選舉時蘇貞昌聲言要投入4000億台幣來改善高雄的基建，當時已經引起爭議，然而最近高雄大火導致嚴重死傷，再一次提醒大家，這些都是空頭支票，就是「競選時天花亂墜的口號」！
習近平對目前的選舉制度，同時為民主標桿列出了更明確和具體的比對標準：「一個國家民主不民主，關鍵在於是不是真正做到了人民當家作主。」投票權是個樣式，真正重要的是人民有沒有廣泛參與權；選舉過程中的承諾，要看實現了多少；政治程序和規則的有效性，要看這些制度和法規是不是真正得到了執行；權力運行規則和程序是否民主，更要看權力是否真正受到人民監督和制約。
所以習近平提出的一個關鍵，就是民主最終是要落到實處，真正衡量一個地區的民主程度，是實踐、是當地人民是否認同政府的政策方向和取得的成效，否則一切説起來多動聽的制度都是枉然。正如選票選舉是否有效的監督和制約方法？答案很多時候是否定的，尤其是越大規模的選舉，越缺乏所謂民主監察的作用。表面上大型直接選舉，有數以十萬甚至百萬計的選票，那不是很廣泛和難以操控的嗎？現實並不如此，過於廣泛的選區，也代表著要有足夠龐大的資源來完成選舉工程，獨立和小型政黨根本無法籌集足夠的資金、甚至無法生存，又或者只能歸附於大型政黨，最終民主選舉也只是變成了「銀主選舉」，誰多金？誰有資源？誰的勝望更高。
尤其是在龐大的選舉工程之下，又有哪個選民能夠真正了解、分析、評價候選人的能力？最終選票只會受傳媒和社交媒體的影響、變成情緒化的選擇，正如特朗普販賣仇外而成為美國總統，最近 Facebook 創辦人Zuckurberg被揭發干預選舉的方法，甚至不是透過宣傳候選人，而是利用選舉的規則，通過NGO推動對有利民主黨選民投票的安排，例如改善郵遞投票，從而達到提高民主黨得票的目的。
權力階層也刻意強調選民可以用「選票」趕走不滿意的政治人物，這個貌似人民至上、不畏強權的説法只是用來安慰選民，真實情況是誰能成為候選人早受操縱，來來去去都只有A餐或B餐，選民根本別無選擇；以為不滿意將來可以另選他人，結果就演變成今日最常見的「鬥爛選舉」，要想選賢任能、善政善治、以民為本？也成了緣木求魚，因為賢能從來不曾在選舉名單內出現。
中國的選舉架構是以人民代表大會制度為載體，一般人只會看到最頂層全國人大的兩千多人，而忽略之下數以萬計的各級人大組織，形成龐大的金字塔，再由下而上層層挑選而成。在最底層的縣級和鄉級人大代表，採取直接選舉的辦法產生。具體做法是，將縣和鄉兩級行政區域劃分為若干選區，由選區的選民直接投票分別選舉產生這兩級人大代表。而在縣級以上就採用間接選舉，由各級的人大選出上一級的人大代表，縣選出市、再選出省代表、然後到全國人大。更重要的是強調挑選賢能，避免在選舉過程中造成互相攻擊，選民通過投票行使權利和在作出重大決策之前進行充分協商，透過諮詢甚至是考試，對候選人作出審核。盡可能就共同性問題取得一致意見，是中國社會主義民主的重要形式。
再者，選舉過程只是人大制度的一部分，甚至是小部分，正如習近平強調，不僅有完整的制度程序，而且有完整的參與實踐。人大制度是實現中國全過程人民民主的制度載體，更重要的是在施政過程中，不斷擴大人民有序政治參與，加強人權法治保障，保證人民依法享有廣泛權利和自由。除了要保證人民依法行使選舉權利，更要保證人民的知情權、參與權、表達權、監督權落實到人大工作各方面各環節全過程，確保黨和國家在決策、執行、監督落實各個環節，都能聽到來自人民的聲音。
當然你可以繼續質疑中國的民主制度，但事實擺在眼前，中國政府得到人民的信任，很高的支持度和認受性，普遍中國人民認同政府的發展方向，遠超其他歐美國家，這不是有效的實踐和實在的評價嗎？
在習近平的講話中，或許最重要的地方，是對於民主制度應當開放胸懷，西方社會對於中國民主制度的嘲諷，只反映出他們「不民主」的態度：「民主是各國人民的權利，而不是少數國家的專利。一個國家是不是民主，應該由這個國家的人民來評判，而不應該由外部少數人指手畫腳來評判。實現民主有多種方式，不可能千篇一律。用單一的標尺衡量世界豐富多彩的政治制度，用單調的眼光審視人類五彩繽紛的政治文明，本身就是不民主的。」
US politician’s bias against DJI stems from political calculation by Global Times Oct 20 2021
US DJI Illustration – Out of self-interested political calculation, an anti-China American politician on Tuesday called for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to impose new restrictions on China-based drone maker DJI, one of the most successful Chinese technology companies which are eyesores of Washington.
The FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said in a statement that the telecommunications regulator should commence the process of adding DJI to the FCC’s so-called Covered List which would prohibit federal Universal Service Fund (USF) dollars from being used to purchase the company’s equipment.
According to FCC, USF “operated as a mechanism by which interstate long distance carriers were assessed to subsidize telephone service to low-income households and high-cost areas.”
The so-called security risks, cited by Carr, are baseless. The drone maker has encountered multiple rounds of ill-intended crackdowns in the US. Last December, the US Commerce Department announced to put DJI on its entity list, cutting off American supplies to the company.
However, the impact on DJI appears to be limited, and so will the latest threat of new restrictions. After being blacklisted by the US Commerce Department, the drone maker replied that “customers in America can continue to buy and use DJI products normally.”
Apparently, the anti-China politicians in Washington have been using the topic to advance their own political interests. Their thinking reveals a skewed confrontational mindset of the politicians which blocks normal cooperation between businesses of the two countries.
In fact, whether it is DJI or other Chinese technology companies, the US crackdown is having a diminishing effect. Of the global drone market, DJI now accounts for over 70 percent of the total market share, and more than 50 percent of drone sales in the US.
Huawei, another Chinese technology giant, has also endured the US government’s crackdown for years. The company has stepped up efforts to realize core technology independence, and is making forays to new business lines, such as smarter ports, data centers, intelligent mining and 5G-enabled electric vehicle navigational system.
Chinese technology firms and their products have been growing despite external pressures, from space technology to 5G high-speed mobile networks. Moreover, China has sufficient tool kit to cope with vicious outside attacks and protect the legitimate interest of its businesses.
China in June also passed the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law to counter bullies. In line with international law and the basic norms governing international relations, the law offers legal tools to protect Chinese businesses.
As a matter of fact, confrontation is the worst path for bilateral corporate relations between the two countries. Many American companies want to cooperate with their Chinese counterparts to make the most out of China’s huge market.
The article was compiled based on an interview with Ma Jihua, a veteran industry analyst. bizopinion@globaltimes.com.cn
The ugly reality of the American empire by Alex Lo, October 20, 2021
An American columnist says that building functioning, legitimate states is woven into the diplomatic DNA of the USA. That’s the beautification of empire. The reality of empire is how many dysfunctional and illegitimate states have been created by and through US intervention.
“For better or worse, nation building is woven into America’s diplomatic DNA. The effort to build functioning, legitimate states in troubled societies has been part of US foreign policy since America has been a global power.” – Hal Brands, Bloomberg opinion columnist, on the aftermath of the Afghanistan disaster.
Brands is being historically “modest”. The United States was frequently intervening throughout the late 18th and 19th centuries, in what would become Canada, in Mexico, and up and down the entire South America. After all, the practice of the Monroe Doctrine, which treated the western hemisphere as its own geopolitical and economic backyard, was enunciated as early as the 1820s. And that was when the US was only a regional power. So, it’s hardly surprising the US began intervening everywhere around the world – once it became a global power. DNA indeed!
Have you ever wondered why and how the US has been at war in 229 years of its 245 years in existence, equivalent to 93 per cent of its history? This doesn’t count foreign subversions, coup sponsorships, assassinations and war by proxies.
Be that as it may, among many within the US political elite, Brands’ statement is self-evident. For most people in the rest of the world, though, it is arrogant, distasteful, repulsive. To be fair, most Americans I know would also reject the statement. But then, they are not part of the US elites.
Brands is articulating the logic of empire and its beautification. The first part (the logic of empire) is well understood by the ruling and military-industrial elites in the US; the beautification of empire is left to scholars and columnists such as Brands to sanitise the horrors, war crimes, suffering, poverty and mass killings the US has inflicted on the rest of the world. You need the second part to hide the first. In the modern world, it won’t do just to take over someone else’s economy and undermine their government and society. You have to do it for their own good, to give them freedom, democracy and free market, to protect their human rights.
“The effort to build functioning, legitimate states in troubled societies…”: That’s the beautification of empire talking. The reality or the logic of empire is how many dysfunctional and illegitimate states have been created by and through US intervention – by worsening already “troubled societies” and by collapsing otherwise functioning societies into troubled ones or even failed states.
Alex Lo has been a Post columnist since 2012, covering major issues affecting Hong Kong and the rest of China. A journalist for 25 years, he has worked for various publications in Hong Kong and Toronto as a news reporter and editor. He has also lectured in journalism at the University of Hong Kong.
The double face of the Dalai Lama – Tibet, the other side of the story by Frans Vandenbosch. Published Mar 16, 2017
Tibet was, after several invasions, annexed by the Mongols and became part of the Mongol Empire in 1240. The same fate also underwent China: Genghis Kahn defeated the Western Xia (China) and the Jin Dynasty (China). In 1279 also the Song dynasty was overtrown by the Mongols.
Genghis Khan and his sons / successors caused throughout Eurasia an unprecedented never matched bloodbath. In China, between 1195 and 1235, they reduced the population from 50 million to 8.5 million.
Kublai Khan, grandson of Genghis, founded the Yuan Dynasty, ruling over all of China, including Tibet. Kublai Kahn, during his reign as emperor of China, adopted to the Chinese culture and political system; he made his own Mongolian language and culture subordinate to the Chinese.
After the Yuan (Mongol) Dynasty came the Ming dynasty (1368 – 1644/1683) and then the Qing dynasty (Manchu) until the chaos and collapse in 1912. All these seven centuries Tibet remained part of China, as many other (by the Mongols conquered) areas.
At the beginning of the Republic of China (the period from 1912 by Sun Yat-sen, the warlords, the fake emperors, military leaders, the riots, famine and great distress) a number of areas and vassal states disengaged from China. So also Tibet. Tibet became de facto independent, but was never recognised by any other country, not even by the US or UK.
Upon the withdrawal of the Guómíndǎng (Kuomintang) to Taiwan in 1949 and the founding of the PRC, the Communists of Mao Zedong of the People’s Liberation Army invaded Tibet in 1951. Tibet, after some 40 years, became part of China again. Mao promised Tibet independence, but later he only spoke about autonomy.
In the 1960ties, the US (military and CIA) actions in Tibet amounted 1.7 bil. USD/year, including a yearly subsidy of 180000 USD for the Dalai Lama. (his brother, Gyalo Thondup, was a CIA agent)
In an agreement between China and the US in 1980, the CIA actions would cease. But soon after the NED (the “CIA2”) has taken over the sponsoring; until today. In 2014, the NED sponsored 22 organisations in Tibet with 621134 USD
Further details: read Richard M Bennett “Tibet, the ‘great game’ and the CIA”
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tibet-other-side-story-frans-vandenbosch
Johnson Choi Biz