西西河

主题:abc的世界观估计是比较矛盾的。 -- songcla

共:💬25 🌺35 新:
全看分页树展 · 主题
家园 abc的世界观估计是比较矛盾的。

读了纽约时报关于google事件的文章的评论,基本是预料之中,不过有一个abc的评论却颇让人心酸。

一点点点评。

人的基本世界观是在幼年时期经历的主流文化下形成的。谁对谁错也许都不重要了,悲伤的是海外第一代和第二代之间的隔阂,第一代不是一个真正的西方人,第二代也不可能做真正的中国人了。

新一代的中国留学生思潮左转,大部分和所谓的自卑情结无关,而主要是西藏奥运等等一系列事件刺激的。

海外的中国人是否存在自卑情结,可能有,但是原因不在国内,因为很难想象一个主体民族会产生自卑情结,而恰恰是到海外后成为少数民族,受到各方面占优势的当地主体民族的压力产生的。相对来说,第一代反而可能更容易处理,因为成长时期的环境和受到的教育给第一代以民族的信心,而第二代可能没有任何这方面的准备。

对于中国政府,有很多问题,但是显然比西方描述的好的多,也算是在进步中。大多数国外的中国人所以才会支持。

文中隐晦提到中国学生是被洗脑,本质上是历史观的冲突。看待现代问题是基于对历史的认识基础上的。其实第一代和第二代的主要不同可能就是在于历史观。

西方大众对主流历史观的坚信的基础在于“言论自由”,而且这个也是现在中国政府的软肋。

有意思的是,扣除细节部分,客观的看今日世界,中国版本历史观更接近事实。

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/01/23/world/asia/23diplo.html?sort=oldest&offset=3

aren Zhou (from page 1), I am all too familiar with the kind of knee-jerk ignorant "patriotism" you cling to. I am Chinese-American, and during my time in college (I recently graduated), I noticed that a good number of my mainland Chinese colleagues would gripe about Internet censorship while vacationing back home (they would, of course, try to climb the Great Firewall). Yet when they returned to the US for classes, they would go nuts if anyone--especially Chinese--dared to speak ill of China's lack of freedom in this or that area. They would harangue the US, deriding it as imperialist with terms reminiscent of Maoist 'struggle' sessions.

Karen, since I can tell from your last name that you are probably of the mainland, let me give you some news: You are the cream of the crop. You've made it overseas. You understand English. Please, don't try to paternalistically speak for the hundreds of millions of ordinary Chinese who still live in the mainland and don't enjoy the freedoms you do in Canada. You probably have more in common with the average Canadian than the average factory worker or farmer in China who actually has legitimate grievances to air against the government.

Your argument is specious in another respect. Chinese folks the likes of you love to lecture about how "Chinese culture" is supposedly based upon uniformity of belief. Well, let's see. If that's the case, then have the people in Taiwan been "violating" Chinese culture? After all, Taiwan has preserved traditional Chinese culture far more than the mainland has (think Cultural Revolution). How about Hong Kong? Upon reverting to China, the mainland granted them a "Basic Law" giving them relative freedom of speech. So is HK also somehow "un-Chinese"? How about Chinese communities abroad in the Americas and in Europe? You and I live in Western nations and we both probably identify with a local Chinese community. Now, the Chinese government claims that if it were to allow Internet freedom, then the Chinese people would fall into instability and disorder. Let me ask you: Of all the challenges we Chinese face in the West, when was the last time your Chinese community was torn apart by Internet freedom? Hmm? Are your Chinese friends feeling helpless because they can't cope with Internet freedom?

You write that allowing Internet freedom "is like imposing your values on a group of people who needs to be governed in a different way." Let me ask you: Where did the ideology that underlies the CCP originate from? You know, Marxism-Leninism? I'm pretty well-versed in Chinese history, and I just don't think we made that crock up! And if you say that Chinese have their own unique way of governance, then why haven't Chinese like you been calling for a restoration of the dynastic system? That was our unique way of governing ourselves for oh, I don't know, 5,000 years--until a bunch of middle-class populists (Mao & Co.) decided that China ought to violently throw out its political system and institute one conceived of by..Germans! Very original, eh? (Note: If you didn't get the sarcasm, I don't actually advocate returning to being ruled by emperors. But you should!)

What I discovered in college, Karen, was that Chinese who think like you actually have some sort of an "inferiority country complex." You guys are reluctant to criticize the government of your motherland because of one or a combination of four main factors. One, the government probably helped you and your family become successful. That's why you can afford to come overseas and "represent" the masses--you don't want to bite the hand that fed you. Two, you somehow think that if you criticize the CCP less, foreigners will follow. Three, you were educated in China, and therefore didn't have access to a lot of censored material people elsewhere have that reflects poorly upon the CCP. Four, you are ashamed of certain aspects of China's development and think that admitting them to Westerners would bring shame on China as a nation. (As if Westerners didn't already know!)

None of these reasons, however, are justifiable excuses for being knee-jerk nationalistic. When I studied abroad in China, I did not go there with the sort of national arrogance that many "patriotic" mainland Chinese tend to have here in America. I made a distinction between the US government and US society. I was not afraid to discuss the respective shortcomings--and strengths--of both entities. People like you, however, conflate the two, and therein lies great danger. Karen, we Chinese have much to be proud of in our traditional culture and values. But appreciating Chinese culture need not, and is not, equivalent to a need to blindly defend the Chinese government at all costs, as if it were representative of the Chinese people (not). That is a lie perpetuated by the Chinese government, and it is really quite sad that otherwise educated Chinese like you have eagerly bought into it. Go talk with some real netizens in China!

全看分页树展 · 主题


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河