Gus,
Don't you think that mainland China's leadership basically has a very pragmatic agenda?
yes, in a paranoid way to protect their own regime and the local interests. But it is understandable in the face of foreign interests or threats towards China.
I mean I don't think that Jiang Zemin, Zhu Rongji and the others are fundamentally against Western democracy; instead, what Chinese leaders are forcefully opposed to is the wholesale splintering of their great country: Chinese belong to an old civilization after all.... they just can't be fooled by "Western barnstormers" who want to sell them the "100%-Anglo-Saxon Democracy" package! 'Cause they know that, in the Chinese case, it'd merely be a proxy for breakaway politics.
Exactly! And what the Western capitalists (especially the Brits) don't like to see is the fact that the traditionalism within the Chinese pride in the country would more or less give Western businesses an uneasy time to compete in China. That's why you see the Brits burnt the local culture in the Opium War. And when you go to Australia or New Zealand, the local folks basically have been driven out of the Brit system. In case of Hong Kong, it is a bit special for the Brit, because they don't want to offend the big Chinese govt. Plus, they do want to establish a stable market there to attract other foreign investment, so they can make money in an easy way and go home retired. But they did make a mistake when they handed Hong Kong over to China - that is, the globalization of corporate capitalism by Li Ka Shing. The Brits have been complaining about his monopoly power in Hong Kong and other regions around the world. The US politicians also have been aware of him too. But I think he is just an ordinary folk (without much political agenda) who grew up basically from poverty.
regards,
Q |
