On Sunday, May 3, I tuned to CSPAN at around 7:30PM for no particular reason, mostly because CSPAN is ‘real stuff’ and not media-written and it’s often more interesting than the ‘entertaining’ stuff.
For the last 30 minutes of the hour they were broadcasting the Wednesday Virgina Governor Democratic primary debates, and I felt kind of stupid for that because the candidates were promising things left and right. The entire affair felt extremely…flaccid? Just not a very good feeling. There wasn’t so much a debate as it was a good-natured ‘campaigning’ sort of thing: none of the candidates attacked each other outright, but there were a lot of attacks on Republicans and overall I didn’t get the impression that any of them would be particularly useful to Virginia.
Surprisingly, the hour-long segment afterwards completely healed everything over, and it was about one of the topics I usually find less than pleasant: China.
Evan Osnos, the Beijing Bureau Chief of the Chicago Tribune and a contributor to The New Yorker (he blogs about China there), was interviewed in this hour-long segment regarding life, politics, and economy in China. It’s very strange that it takes a white guy to make me feel better about China. I have Chinese blood and all that, but just talking to my mother and relatives, or hearing the people that call in to the Chinese radio talkshows to express their opinions, I have always gotten sour about China.
It’s absolutely fine to be proud of China. The country is a massive improvement over what it was 30 years ago, and understandably it’s a significant accomplishment and worthy of celebration. But my mother has gotten rather arrogant lately about the ‘betterness’ of China in comparison to America. Namely, off what she hears off the radio, she’s already concluded that the economy of China is better than the U.S. and that’s all that matters, and soon China will be bigger and better than the U.S., with only economy as the measuring stick. It doesn’t matter than she really doesn’t know the research and statistics and the context of each economy, or the analysis of multiple viewpoints, or know about the histories of various countries with booming economies that suffered a bit afterwards (JAPAN, THE NEIGHBOR).
This mentality exasperates me significantly, because all the gold and money spilling about in Chinese faces blinds them to the problems their government and political system, and makes the arrogance of people with views like my mother’s fairly grating due to the massive ignorance involved. The major problem stems from being in a foreign nation, with only one local radio station to understand, and one or two newspapers to read from, coupled with computer illiteracy and therefore no information searching on the internet.
But maybe it’s just my own internal issues, and the reason I paid Osnos more heed was because he presented a more thought-out view of China, with small details and examples. But even before him, I thought China would eventually evolve from its single party system (Wiki sez itz People’s Democratic Dictatorship, lol what an oxymoron), because you can’t have a population of China’s size controlled by a small group that continues on for decades in the current world. Not with the internet, and not with education. Hopefully, the changes will be non-bloody.
And the evolution? I think it’ll actually resemble the U.S.’s. Because this system is far from perfect, but slowly and surely we have progressed. For a nation less than 300 years old, we’ve come a ways, but there’s still a long stretch of future. I think what makes this government great, however, isn’t that it’s AMERICANFREEDOMJUSTICEbleh, but rather that it is a government that changes and reforms with time, and that is really a very important aspect of a government: flexibility.
However, I rage at the people in this nation, who had education and opportunities the Chinese didn’t, but follow every word of Rush Limbaugh. If people honestly believe his words should be the future, then I wonder about what kind of evolution of government it is.