Chinese PR, a Personal View

[Kolaps]

Hate to say this but Chinese PR is a totally failure

The most EVIL and HATEFUL country in the world!

 

[TaiShang]

I decided to write this because of this article. The Dalai Lama and the Politics of Reincarnation | The Diplomat

I just want to present a different case. Granted this is a pretty rough idea, and really, it's just a rant.


Since 1949, when China decided that would be a communist nation and not part of the Western alliance Chang had been in, the battle of the PR has raged.

Though at that time, the attacks have been few and far between, even though we were far worse at the time, but we were just a dinner rolls on the table rather than the Steak or the Lobster. Nobody ever reviews the appetizer.

Today China faces a different set of challenge, how to have a positive, or at the least not negative view of itself around the world.

Most people on this forum would say stop imperialism, bullying, and other destabilizing acts. I would take that advise if it mean anything other than boxing China in. Essentially if we accepted Vietnam and Philippine's claim our fleet can't even do any anti piracy operations in the gulf of Aden without going into other's claim zones.

But I'm not here to talk about that, the reason is simply I don't think that's what's making the headlines. What's actually making China look bad is actually our domestic issues.

Tibet, XinJiang, freedom, or lack of it, pollution, human rights and so on so forth. But as I have explained in previous thread, a lot of those are based on ground realities, and not so much on a ruthless dictatorship that simply doesn't exist. But I'm not here to defend these actions, I want to talk solution.



This may not shock you, but my thinking are in the lines of continue economic progress as number one, but greater emphasis on environment. So basically, first become developed, than become free and just. Are these two mutually exclusive? No, but for China to change course now it would obviously impact progress, even a proven soldier needs time with a new weapon.

Can one be done without the other? If history is any indication, the answer is most likely yes.


Why would I suggest such a course of action? Why not slow economic progress and progress on both fronts together? I'll use a few countries as examples, India, Philippines and Indonesia, they have been called stable democracies, how many of you reading this want to actually live there? How many Filipinos have escaped their home land? How many Indians? How many of the world have an actual positive view of these countries, aside from the one fact they are democracy?

I heard far worse things said about India and Philippines in Canada and US by their own people than even Chinese, ok that's a push, we can be pretty vicious, lol.


This leads me to the conclusion that economic progress must be first, for even if today we allow true democracy, freedom matching the US, and respect for human rights like the UK, and stop anything and everything military, even disband the PLA, we would still be laughed at, and critical of by developed countries.

For not being able to provide adequate health services, security, living standards, education and more are still problems that needed solutions. While freedom and Human rights can be established far quicker, these former criteria are more or less elusive to all but a few.

From what I can see, while there are still some articles that talks Chinese accomplishment, all those that are dwarfed by it, democratic or not, have not really received much praise for its system, which suffers the same realities that we do, but worse, since their resources are far less.

So for China to actually have a positive image, what it needs is both, and if we accept my premise that if we start radical transformation right now, that it would at least delay our progress by a decade if not more, then my solution of economy first than rights, seems the fastest way to go.


On the other hand, if democratic values, freedom and rights are the only thing that's needed for a positive PR, then this idea would sound pretty ridiculous wouldn't it.



Edit: Just to add a point I missed, I'm not saying changing values would for sure slow it down, but given that rights and freedom is the easier of the two to achieve than prosperity and other rights and freedoms, why do the easier of the two first and risk the harder of the two.

Logic dictates, that it would be far more sensible to do the hard one first and if all goes to crap, we can always switch to the second, without losing anything that we could realistically expect to progress.

Basically if our economic progress tanks, we can always switch to those values while at the same time not affecting the economy much anyways, rather than switch now and risk having it tank.

What you seem to ignore, my friend, is that bad image, if any, is not because China is regressing, but because it is progressing. Your thesis seems to suggests that the hegemonic powers (the West) has the best interests of China. This is absurd. They hate to see China progress and become as successful as and more successful than they are.

So long as China keeps progressing and beating the West on multiple fronts, bad PR will continue.

You want China to enjoy a nice global image? Be another Japan: Submit your servitude to the US and they will throw out lots of bones on China's way. News about pollution and XiZhang will disappear.

Does the West give a damn about Okinawan/Ryukyuan political oppression by Tokyo?

So, forget about image, it will follow hard power like a poodle dog follows its master. Just ensure that China is strong, has enough destruction capability to guarantee physical security, enjoys a strong internal security apparatus, and capabilty to draw on its own historical dynamics to decide on the best course of political and social action in the future.

China does not need to appease to the West and your post, even if not intended that way, displays a weaker image of China.

I would like to see, in any day, a stronger and feared China rather than a weaker and loved China.

 

[andy_hujian]

We have a "stable" democracy? The last time I checked around, what we have a is mixture of the combination of plutocracy and oligarchy to the point that we almost resemble a feudal state, mob-rule anarchy (the 1986 and 2001 "People Power" revolts are examples) and "showbiztocracy" - a state were many of the politicians used to be actors and actresses or still practicing being both a politician and showbiz personality at the same time.

I'd like to add. An "ordered democracy" leads to a good country in every aspect.

 

[Jlaw]

it's not about PR, it's all about geo-politics, when China and the west were allied against Soviet during 70s, no western media talked about democracy and human right in china, but actually, 70s was the worst period of social development in china, hell, when Nixon visit china, all the western media were told to not report any bad news, but try to paint china as a capitalist and progressing country, and a American ally. when Nixon landed on beijing airport, the slogan on the wall were still wrote as "down with west imperialism" , but not a single shit was given.
After the collapse of the Soviet, and china became increasingly assertive and powerful, the west started to paint china as evil. the so called soft power will follow when the time china's hard power surpass the west. when the US was rising, it was also demonised by the british，same as the rise of germany and japan. don't expect the west show benevolence to china, who cares about tibet, human right and pollution, if we bring infrastructure and education to tibet, west will say we destroy the tibet culture, if we keep tibet as natural, they will say we discriminate against tibetans.
A rising power is supposed to be hated by others, nobody hate Fiji.

Good points. Also during ww2 a weak China was viewed in positive by US. I was astonished just how positive views US had of China and portrayed japs badly.

Now we are strong so the US controlled media will cherry pick and exaggerate odd news to make us look bad. We should not steer away from what we do best because that's what the west want us to do.

 

[Jlaw]

@Genesis
You living in the west can make you feel inferior by white people. I like it when they criticize China because they lack knowledge on world politics and jealous of China's development. But generally the ones i talk to (white people) just lack world geopolitical knowledge. Most conversation about China is how they think China will lead the world economically in next twenty years. I know it's true but I downplay it and say something diplomatic.

 

[TaiShang]

@Genesis
You living in the west can make you feel inferior by white people. I like it when they criticize China because they lack knowledge on world politics and jealous of China's development. But generally the ones i talk to (white people) just lack world geopolitical knowledge. Most conversation about China is how they think China will lead the world economically in next twenty years. I know it's true but I downplay it and say something diplomatic.

Better to keep them blissfully ignorant and thus happy, right? LOL. Good strategy.

 

[BoQ77]

Good points. Also during ww2 a weak China was viewed in positive by US. I was astonished just how positive views US had of China and portrayed japs badly.
.

Chiang Kai shek did a good job to improve the image of China in West vision.

 

[Jlaw]

Chiang Kai shek did a good job to improve the image of China in West vision.

Chiang kai shek is your grandfather.

 

[BoQ77]

Chiang kai shek is your grandfather.

@Hu Songshan : this guy insult and troll.
Chiang Kei shek is Chinese.