EPTGoogle's New Approach to China - Page 12
| Forum Index > General Forum |
motbob
United States12546 Posts
| ||
|
TwoSugarsAndACream
Canada21 Posts
For 5 thousand years it has been ruled under one emperor (at a time), and suddenly you want China to be democratic, to have free speech, have everything "the west" has? As a Chinese (Not chinaman, Moltke) who immigrated to Canada 14 years ago, I honestly believe that China will not change. In fact, as an individual, submitting to another culture feels like I was brought up the wrong way and as if I am an alien (and still does), even though I've been subject to Canadian culture (if there is any...poutine? lol cmon) for 14 years. I speak for myself by the way, I don't speak on behalf of any country with more than 8 people (including Canada). I think a lot of your believes comes from how you are brought up. If China was "in control" (instead of the west), then the scenario would be that Chinese people would want to convert your western believes of free speech and all that noodles into Chinese believes. Would you want that? Obviously not, seeing how most people are against how the Chinese are operating. Likewise for Chinese people, when western cultures try to change the Chinese people, how do you think they will respond? Seriously just leave them alone. Europeans learned to find their way into fighting for their own freedom, why don't you just let the Chinese do it for themselves? Oh sorry, we are intellectually unequal to the western world, and therefore we cannot fight for ourselves... | ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
Freedom of speech and rally is supposed to guaranteed as well as forming your own political party. Such rights were clearly written on the constitution but were never implemented. How ironic is it to read one thing but expect another? The earlier revolutionaries and communists were prosecuted for the same reasons. I support Google if their motive was the same as their motto. | ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
On January 15 2010 06:00 TwoSugarsAndACream wrote: Give China sometime guys...I physically feel sick at some of the hate and negatively towards China. For 5 thousand years it has been ruled under one emperor (at a time), and suddenly you want China to be democratic, to have free speech, have everything "the west" has? As a Chinese (Not chinaman, Moltke) who immigrated to Canada 14 years ago, I honestly believe that China will not change. In fact, as an individual, submitting to another culture feels like I was brought up the wrong way and as if I am an alien (and still does), even though I've been subject to Canadian culture (if there is any...poutine? lol cmon) for 14 years. I speak for myself by the way, I don't speak on behalf of any country with more than 8 people (including Canada). I think a lot of your believes comes from how you are brought up. If China was "in control" (instead of the west), then the scenario would be that Chinese people would want to convert your western believes of free speech and all that noodles into Chinese believes. Would you want that? Obviously not, seeing how most people are against how the Chinese are operating. Likewise for Chinese people, when western cultures try to change the Chinese people, how do you think they will respond? Seriously just leave them alone. Europeans learned to find their way into fighting for their own freedom, why don't you just let the Chinese do it for themselves? Oh sorry, we are intellectually unequal to the western world, and therefore we cannot fight for ourselves... So what exactly has changed? The emperors restricted trade and put people in different social classes based on the fact that the populace is dumb and can not be trusted with knowledge, instead he relies on the intellectuals to administrate. fast forward to now, same problem, the government is trying to suppress knowledge arguing that the populace are not ready. People needs to understand this. We Chinese spend the last thousands of years perfecting our states craft, we made an art out of how to control a large population. Maintaining order is their game. Chinese dynasties only collapse when external changes cause sit to collapse, such as natural disasters, foreign invasion etc... RIP google.cn, you've fight the good fight. | ||
|
TwoSugarsAndACream
Canada21 Posts
On January 15 2010 06:08 haduken wrote: So what exactly has changed? The emperors restricted trade and put people in different social classes based on the fact that the populace is dumb and can not be trusted with knowledge, instead he relies on the intellectuals to administrate. fast forward to now, same problem, the government is trying to suppress knowledge arguing that the populace are not ready. People needs to understand this. We Chinese spend the last thousands of years perfecting our states craft, we made an art out of how to control a large population. Maintaining order is their game. Chinese dynasties only collapse when external changes cause sit to collapse, such as natural disasters, foreign invasion etc... RIP google.cn, you've fight the good fight. I just feel differently than you do on this issue. I feel that change should be natural (internal, at least), and shouldn't be forced externally. This could be affected by my personal judgement, I'd rather change something about myself based on my own opinion than have people tell me how I should change subject to their view. Add: I read your last sentence carefully (3 times) and I have to say that is not why the dynasties fell...they fell because of the inheritance from one king to the next through bloodline. The first emperors in a long dynasty (e.g. the Han, Tang, Qin) were all successful, it isn't until it passes down many generations that it falls apart. Hard to explain and translate to English, but the real reason is that as the kings are passed down they are more incompetent than the next (with the exception of the western Han). Obviously this involves people starving and emperors just don't care, or know to care. Then you have rebellions, invasions from Mongols and Manchurians seeing weakness in the Dynasty. But really that's kind of off topic. | ||
|
obesechicken13
United States10467 Posts
On January 13 2010 10:02 Smorrie wrote: Sent the link to my friend in China.. his response: Can't see.. link is blocked. lmao lmaox2 Just a small note, is there reason for concern over one's freedom of speech if one lives in China? I mean the media is very much against activists stirring up trouble because they are influenced by foreign media (ie google + circumvention). If the Chinese government has access to Chinese activists' search(as the article seems to suggest they were trying to do), they could monitor or even harm them. I would bet baidu gives all their info to the Chinese government, so there's almost no privacy there. It's not difficult to believe that any government is corrupt enough to harm any dissenters. | ||
|
old times sake
165 Posts
So I don't think it's necessarily taboo to try to make some general observation about Chinese people, especially ones that are completely native to China as opposed to just descendant from it, although even then you are actually on fine ground. It in no way means that your Dalmatian is annoying, just that, as a group, they may be, according to someone's opinion. Don't get sickened by it. Don't write your congressman. Chill out, and have a difference of opinion. It should be okay for me to say that I don't generally like Irishmen if that's how I feel, and to say what trends I have observed. It's not the result of scientific study, but neither is most of what is said on any forum. And yes, there are exceptions. There are gay men who don't lisp or show any effeminate body language or speech mannerisms. But if you are irritated by those things, you might observe that most gay men exhibit them, and say that therefore as a group gay men annoy you. It doesn't mean that 100% of all gay men will do this as a rule. Don't equivocate. BTW I'm a gay man and no they don't annoy me; it's just an example. So, that being in mind, I stand up for the ability to say things about "Chinese" people or "Chinese" government or "China," whether positive or negative. I don't try to apply some unnatural linguistic standard to it, and don't really think people saying they are "appalled" or "disgusted" by such speech are in the right. Be that as it may, China will do what it thinks it needs to do, which apparently includes stabbing corporations in the back who have bent over backwards to work with them even to the point they look evil in the eyes of the rest of civilization. Yes, I think China stabbed Google in the back, and yes I would say it's because they lack judgment and don't know better, and I think they won't learn anything from this because they still have the same problems--they (and clearly I'm speaking of the way the regime behaves right now, but if you have some leftist need to alert your p.c.-dar on me here then go ahead--I love flamewars with pseudo-sensitives) lack judgment and don't know better. You could say that they "have their reasons", and of course they do--I just think those reasons will largely turn out to be wrong. Clearly what they have done here is put their hand in the cookie jar thinking they wouldn't get caught. It's the bad thinking of common criminals, and they won't even realize this because here's how it's going to go down: They'll spin it as them doing something legitimate and Google doing something stupid. Everyone will only hear this explanation on TV and in their newspapers for a week or two. Word of mouth will be shut down largely out of fear, but of course the more educated class will know what really happened but it hardly will matter. Eventually, both explanations will have credibility even in the minds of those who have the luxury to have both, but only one will be publicly permissible to say or hear, and that one will be the only one known by the majority. Whether believed or not, the state explanation will have all the functions that a true explanation normally has available to it, while the other will be all but criminalized. This is what China does with any controversy. Saying this should not insult you as a Chinese person or Chinese-descent person. They did this with bird flu, the milk fiasco, and H1N1 just to name a few. Someone in China does something bad, or something bad happens in China. At first they say it didn't happen. If forced further they admit something small and harmless. If forced further they say that they admitted it all along and have addressed the problem. At no point is the state or anyone it it (besides an enemy of the state) ever at fault. The truth changes to keep this true at all times. You might think this way of thinking is necessary but clearly it has its downsides. Outbreaks are denied and untreated because of this. Stupid behaviors towards corporations are not believed to be such. Poisoned milk kills more children than was necessary. All this, we are supposed to believe, is to prevent bigger problems. Maybe it does. How do you prove that it didn't prevent something that was allegedly prevented? Maybe my typing this keeps the moon from crashing into the Earth. Physicists may challenge this, but if we go the Chinese way, those physicists will be suppressed anyways. Think about it. | ||
|
TwoSugarsAndACream
Canada21 Posts
At no point is the state or anyone it it (besides an enemy of the state) ever at fault. The truth changes to keep this true at all times. You might think this way of thinking is necessary but clearly it has its downsides. Outbreaks are denied and untreated because of this. Stupid behaviors towards corporations are not believed to be such. Poisoned milk kills more children than was necessary. All this, we are supposed to believe, is to prevent bigger problems. Maybe it does. How do you prove that it didn't prevent something that was allegedly prevented? Maybe my typing this keeps the moon from crashing into the Earth. Physicists may challenge this, but if we go the Chinese way, those physicists will be suppressed anyways. Think about it. Can you explain what you mean in a short paragraph or couple of sentences. It confuses me, especially the last part. But if I'm not mistaken, you are trying to tell me that I should allow people to criticize China because they are only opinions? Well what of my opinions then? Shouldn't I express them? Think about that. | ||
|
KissBlade
United States5718 Posts
| ||
|
proberecall
United States104 Posts
Mankind all through his history has been deprived of evolving. As time has moved on, man has been smart enough to figure that him being deprived of evolution is simply not good, and that evolution although may challenge "the system, the laws, what has been standing", is right. The roman empire, the ottoman empire, the mongolian empire, all those are gone now and they were oppressive government systems that kept their people "pacified". I do believe that people shouldn't be pacified, whereas people should have freedom of do what they want of course in a context of what should do is right (such as laws, constitutions, etc) that are founded under the principle that man is born free. For instance, imagine if the holy roman empire during the modern age, would have kept Galileo or Copernicus or Newton "pacified", just to name a few examples. We'd probably still be using horses and carriages, and candlelights. I surely have nothing to speak regarding chinese people as a previous poster from China mentioned, they are poor and would do anything to get rich; if you think about it, a high percentage (I'm not going to say the majority) of mankind, somehow wants to get rich. And I'm not talking about getting millionaire, wealthy, billionaire, but to improve his quality of life, for him and for his beloved ones, yes both materially and intellectually too. Let's face it, who doesn't want to improve his life-style ? Even if it is switching from a $ 5,000 car to an $ 8,000 car, or from a 1400 sq ft house to a 1800 sq ft house. Why most people go to school ? To go to college. Why people go to college ? To learn how to make his life better. Why Galileo stood against the Pope explaining him how the solar system works: because he wanted the human race to evolve. It's human nature to look for the better. What I'm trying to say, again as an outsider ignorant of China and their people, is: think about, if China has 1 billion population, how many scientists could China have ? Cause I'm pretty sure that yes they may be poor and have been wounded mentally for long, but that doesn't mean they're not smart. How many engineers, physicians, sportsmen, from China would be there, that would help improve human race for the better. I'm quite sure China has a lot going on but face it, even 10 million people attending college and getting degrees, is just 0.1 % of their population. The other 99.9 % are just doing nothing productive. Maybe yes, the freedom of speech all at once may be to shocking, but hell, what is it out there that the government doesn't want the population to see ? Yes, porn and violence and stuff, but a lot of intelectual, social, recreative activites are out there too. I am a firm believer of history, and history has always proved that freedom of speech is what has allowed to get us where we are today. | ||
DivinO
United States4796 Posts
| ||
|
Taku
Canada2036 Posts
On January 15 2010 13:09 proberecall wrote: I have been following this thread closely, during the past days, I read post from people that live in China or are in China. I am not chinese nor have any chinese friends or relations with China. I do know this however: Mankind all through his history has been deprived of evolving. As time has moved on, man has been smart enough to figure that him being deprived of evolution is simply not good, and that evolution although may challenge "the system, the laws, what has been standing", is right. The roman empire, the ottoman empire, the mongolian empire, all those are gone now and they were oppressive government systems that kept their people "pacified". I do believe that people shouldn't be pacified, whereas people should have freedom of do what they want of course in a context of what should do is right (such as laws, constitutions, etc) that are founded under the principle that man is born free. For instance, imagine if the holy roman empire during the modern age, would have kept Galileo or Copernicus or Newton "pacified", just to name a few examples. We'd probably still be using horses and carriages, and candlelights. I surely have nothing to speak regarding chinese people as a previous poster from China mentioned, they are poor and would do anything to get rich; if you think about it, a high percentage (I'm not going to say the majority) of mankind, somehow wants to get rich. And I'm not talking about getting millionaire, wealthy, billionaire, but to improve his quality of life, for him and for his beloved ones, yes both materially and intellectually too. Let's face it, who doesn't want to improve his life-style ? Even if it is switching from a $ 5,000 car to an $ 8,000 car, or from a 1400 sq ft house to a 1800 sq ft house. Why most people go to school ? To go to college. Why people go to college ? To learn how to make his life better. Why Galileo stood against the Pope explaining him how the solar system works: because he wanted the human race to evolve. It's human nature to look for the better. What I'm trying to say, again as an outsider ignorant of China and their people, is: think about, if China has 1 billion population, how many scientists could China have ? Cause I'm pretty sure that yes they may be poor and have been wounded mentally for long, but that doesn't mean they're not smart. How many engineers, physicians, sportsmen, from China would be there, that would help improve human race for the better. I'm quite sure China has a lot going on but face it, even 10 million people attending college and getting degrees, is just 0.1 % of their population. The other 99.9 % are just doing nothing productive. Maybe yes, the freedom of speech all at once may be to shocking, but hell, what is it out there that the government doesn't want the population to see ? Yes, porn and violence and stuff, but a lot of intelectual, social, recreative activites are out there too. I am a firm believer of history, and history has always proved that freedom of speech is what has allowed to get us where we are today. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions Oh look a list of things invented throughout Chinese history. How convenient. So tell me at which points in this list Freedom of Speech allowed them to come about? Oh hey and remember that awesome time when the west came to China to enlighten the people there? No? Well here, check it out then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 15 2010 13:09 proberecall wrote: For instance, imagine if the holy roman empire during the modern age, would have kept Galileo or Copernicus or Newton "pacified", just to name a few examples. We'd probably still be using horses and carriages, and candlelights. This is a poor analogy. Free flow of information within the state cannot be compared to free flow of information from without. Furthermore, it's worth pointing out that where Galileo's ideas conflicted with those of the governing ideology of the time (the Catholic Church) his ideas WERE pacified. On January 15 2010 13:09 proberecall wrote: I surely have nothing to speak regarding chinese people as a previous poster from China mentioned, they are poor and would do anything to get rich; if you think about it, a high percentage (I'm not going to say the majority) of mankind, somehow wants to get rich. And I'm not talking about getting millionaire, wealthy, billionaire, but to improve his quality of life, for him and for his beloved ones, yes both materially and intellectually too. Let's face it, who doesn't want to improve his life-style ? Even if it is switching from a $ 5,000 car to an $ 8,000 car, or from a 1400 sq ft house to a 1800 sq ft house. Why most people go to school ? To go to college. Why people go to college ? To learn how to make his life better. Why Galileo stood against the Pope explaining him how the solar system works: because he wanted the human race to evolve. It's human nature to look for the better. It's worth mentioning here something that many Western views take for granted: the various "freedoms" that we accept here came into being through, and exist within, the moral framework of Christian values. While the specifics of various sects may differ, the general moral framework established (and enforced--sometimes in very violent manner) by the Christian church is essential to the functioning of these rights. Freedom of speech functions for the general good because we take for granted that spreading misinformation and slander are vices. It's instilled in the moral education of the citizen of America or Europe that the possible abuses of these rights are "wrong". Now contrast with that with the Chinese citizen, who has no established, common taught religion. As much as people dismiss MoltkeWarding, he got it right that Chinese ethics are rooted heavily in the family and the community. Now combine this with the systematic attack and degradation of these traditional values over the past 150-200 years, as entering regimes (some Chinese and some foreign) systematically tear down and rebuild this value structure. Without the ethical enforcement inherent in a Western upbringing, and with community values successively degraded, it's not hard to see how freedom of speech could be potentially dangerous. The dishonest and the malicious (which still improve the station of the person at hand--the thief is still richer for what he does--just at the expense of others), which are surely criminal exceptions in a Western society, are likely to be far more common. On January 15 2010 13:09 proberecall wrote: What I'm trying to say, again as an outsider ignorant of China and their people, is: think about, if China has 1 billion population, how many scientists could China have ? Cause I'm pretty sure that yes they may be poor and have been wounded mentally for long, but that doesn't mean they're not smart. How many engineers, physicians, sportsmen, from China would be there, that would help improve human race for the better. I'm quite sure China has a lot going on but face it, even 10 million people attending college and getting degrees, is just 0.1 % of their population. The other 99.9 % are just doing nothing productive. And how many thieves, murderers, and revolutionists could be among that population? With a moral structure that does less to discourage such paths than those in the West, it becomes hard to judge whether it would be beneficial or harmful when the sum is taken. Certainly, it's not guaranteed to be harmful anymore than it's guaranteed to be beneficial. But, given China's center-stage position in the political and economic frame of the world--could the rest of the world handle it if things took a turn for the worse? On January 15 2010 13:09 proberecall wrote: I am a firm believer of history, and history has always proved that freedom of speech is what has allowed to get us where we are today. This is wildly speculative. Indeed it's very difficult to even correlate freedom of speech to a positive influence on humanity's development, let alone confirm a causal relationship. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 15 2010 14:24 Boblion wrote: I don't know what freedom of expression has do to do with Christianism but w/e Then you missed the point of my second paragraph. Why do we espouse freedom of expression? Because we believe it is beneficial to a society--that the benefits outweigh it's potential abuses. The thing is, this is not necessarily true outside a western framework of moral values. Free speech is devalued by the criminal abuses of misinformation, slander, and blackmail. A Christian system of moral values--which, ultimately, is at the foundation of most modern Western cultures, keeps this in check because we deem those as vices. It's "wrong" to lie or use damning information to coerce or defame your peers. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On January 15 2010 14:32 TheYango wrote: Then you missed the point of my second paragraph. Why do we espouse freedom of expression? Because we believe it is beneficial to a society--that the benefits outweigh it's potential abuses. The thing is, this is not necessarily true outside a western framework of moral values. Free speech is devalued by the criminal abuses of misinformation, slander, and blackmail. A Christian system of moral values--which, ultimately, is at the foundation of most modern Western cultures, keeps this in check because we deem those as vices. It's "wrong" to lie or use damning information to coerce or defame your peers. I think that the whole "freedom of expression" concept is WAY more related to the old Greek and Roman Republics in the Antiquity. Yea i know those weren't perfect since only adult free males were allowed to vote but this era has influenced way more the current forms of democracy in the Western countries than Christianism. Actually i think that Christianism was clearly one of the most important restraint to freedom of expression lol. Read more about the history of France or Spain for example. About the moral values of people eh i don't know. I think that pretty much all the religions have the same basis. ( No murder, respect your parents, don't steal, pray etc... ) so it doesn't really matter if x% of the Western population is still of Christian background. What about atheists ? muslims ? etc ??? I mean there are tons of non believers nowadays. They can't be trusted too ? I also would like to know what you would think if freedom of expression was banned for first generation Asian people living in the Western countries. I mean eh you even said it yourself.... they have disputable moral values and can't really be trusted. ( yea i'm teasing xD ) | ||
Xxio
Canada5565 Posts
Jess Wu, Venture Partner at The Chinese Founders Fund: “Google is trying to escalate a business problem into a political issue. They want an angle so the U.S. government can get involved. They want nation-to-nation talks. Since no dot-coms have really succeeded in China, I actually think they’ve done a good job reaching at least 20 percent market share. I’ve been talking about this to many friends. It’s OK. It’s no big deal. They all say, ‘Just quit. We don’t care.’ The Chinese government will never back down on the censorship issue. If they do, their power will weaken and they will fall.” I think that China should have an uncensored internet when the government is prepared to handle it and makes the decision on their own. I think having it encroached on them can only be negative in the long run. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On January 15 2010 15:08 Xxio wrote: I don't know if you guys have seen the article with this quote, but I think it sums it up nicely. I agree with what he has to say. Jess Wu, Venture Partner at The Chinese Founders Fund: “Google is trying to escalate a business problem into a political issue. They want an angle so the U.S. government can get involved. They want nation-to-nation talks. Since no dot-coms have really succeeded in China, I actually think they’ve done a good job reaching at least 20 percent market share. I’ve been talking about this to many friends. It’s OK. It’s no big deal. They all say, ‘Just quit. We don’t care.’ The Chinese government will never back down on the censorship issue. If they do, their power will weaken and they will fall.” I think that China should have an uncensored internet when the government is prepared to handle it and makes the decision on their own. I think having it encroached on them can only be negative in the long run. To be fair you could have also quoted people who have a different opinion  Victor Huang, vice president of China Renaissance, an investment bank that counts Kaixin001, the country’s answer to Facebook, and Dangdang, its version of Amazon.com, among its clients: “Why give up so easily? Google is still small here, but China is a very large market. It’s very unusual for a company to stand against the government. It’s really weird. The U.S. government could support them, but there must be a middle way. China is always about the middle way. I don’t think they will quit. Chinese Internet users will stand up for them. That’s why Baidu got hacked. Google is not the only company who faces these issues. One of our clients, 51.com, had to stop their services for a week and a half because of content policies. They only came back up yesterday.” More info on this ? | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 15 2010 14:53 Boblion wrote: About the moral values of people eh i don't know. I think that pretty much all the religions have the same basis. ( No murder, respect your parents, don't steal, pray etc... ) so it doesn't really matter if x% of the Western population is still of Christian background. What about atheists ? muslims ? etc ??? I mean there are tons of non believers nowadays. They can't be trusted too ? Atheists, Muslims, and other Non-Christian communities can similarly be evaluated in the manner of Christian values. Most religions, as you said, ascribe similar moral values, at least in regard to the vices relevant to free speech. Atheists, though not deriving their ethics directly from Christianity, nevertheless have their own moral values, often inherited at least in part from the Christian-like education of public education in various Western countries. Those that ascribe to moral values that are too weak to be compatible with free speech (e.g. slander is a perfectly acceptable part of one's normal actions) are generally few and far between. What separates China is its unique combination of lacking a state religion, and of the more secular source of moral values--the community--being generally degraded by various influences over the last hundred years. On January 15 2010 14:53 Boblion wrote: I also would like to know what you would think if freedom of expression was banned for first generation Asian people living in the Western countries. I mean eh you even said it yourself.... they have disputable moral values and can't really be trusted. ( yea i'm teasing xD ) As the moral values of a Chinese immigrant is tied to his community, so it may conform to his/her new environment as he/she enters a new community. This, arguably is what contributes to the unique worldview of Chinese expatriates, which you earlier deemed as hypocritical. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42691 Posts
On January 15 2010 13:14 Taku wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions Oh look a list of things invented throughout Chinese history. How convenient. So tell me at which points in this list Freedom of Speech allowed them to come about? Oh hey and remember that awesome time when the west came to China to enlighten the people there? No? Well here, check it out then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation The reason the Western world was able to subject China to the misery it did is because China stagnated. Chinese society simply wasn't evolving. Free speech was instrumental in the leap forward the west had which enabled them to progress far beyond China in a single century. At the time of that mission to exploit China China had been stagnant for several centuries and showed no inclination of changing. Heard of the 1421 Chinese expeditions? Basically China surveyed the rest of the world, circumnavigating it several times in technological and logistical feats that were hundreds of years ahead of the west. It was really quite incredible, they visited South America, Australia, east and west coast of America, Greenland and Russia. Unfortunately they then concluded the rest of the world was shit (which it kinda was in comparison to them) and isolated themselves. They stagnated, inventions stopped and a few hundred years later their river defences, in many cases cannon unchanged for hundreds of years, were destroyed by the state of the art British ironclads in the First Opium War. So your point makes no sense historically. You can talk forever about how good they used to be at inventing shit but that didn't change the fact that they changed for the worse. The China attacked by western powers was not the same China that invented all that stuff. | ||
| ||
