PDA

View Full Version : Jackie Chan-"Chinese People need to be controlled"



new2bjj
20th April 09, 10:47 AM
Saw this yesterday, and I was kind of surprised that there was not a thread- Basically, Chan is endorsing a totalitarian government. My engineer brother in law, who is also Chinese, had said something relatively similar. Because of all the dialects, etc, the country would be chaotic. Still, it seems like Chan likes his own freedom-

"Every animal is equal, only some animals are more equal than others!" George Orwell, Animal Farm

http://news.bostonherald.com/track/celebrity/view/2009_04_20_Jackie_Chan_s_comments_spark_protest_in _Taiwan/srvc=home&position=recent

kracker
20th April 09, 11:05 AM
I just lost any respect I might have had for Jackie Chan. LARPing communist.

Ajamil
20th April 09, 11:29 AM
"If we’re not being controlled, we’ll just do what we want."
Uhm, yes, that is usually the case. Obviously he never wanted to direct...

rsobrien
20th April 09, 01:34 PM
I was kinda surprised by that commentary. He grew up in Hong Kong and is an international movie star. If anything he has benefited the most from his freedom of communist rule.

Anyone else think he is being forced to say this by the Chinese government because his family is being held hostage?

I bet him, Chris Tucker, and Sammo Hung are gonna rescue the kidnapped family and pwn the Commies. Jackie will then apologize and retract all his freedom hating commentary.

Give it 3 weeks tops.

OZZ
20th April 09, 03:41 PM
The guy is a bit of an enigma..on the one hand, he gives extremely generously to charites of all kinds and seems like a friendly, open guy. Then you hear about stuff like this and other shit like him and Stallone hanging out and being real knobs all the time to people.
Who knows..I found the first couple of his big films like Rumble In The Bronx and Supercop entertaining and admire him for doing his own stunts, but he does come off like a bit of a phony too.
As for the Totalitarian beliefs - you might be surprised how many Chinese feel that way. Its more common than one would at first surmise, I'll bet.

Kiko
20th April 09, 03:45 PM
You left out the best quote from the original article...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090418/ap_on_en_mo/as_china_people_jackie_chan_6

"If I need to buy a TV, I'll definitely buy a Japanese TV. A Chinese TV might explode."

Shawarma
20th April 09, 03:46 PM
I watched "Hero." The point of Hero was that China was such a godawful splintered mess that it simply needed Qin to come and unite them by force, bringing peace and unity to all the warring factions. If this is a common sentiment in China, I can see where Chan is coming from - fear of chaos and social disorder being greater than the fear of government oppression. And many Chinese oldsters most likely still remember the lawlessness that existed before the heavy-handed communist rule took over.

bob
20th April 09, 03:56 PM
Yes, but that was the same argument that Napolean and Hitler peddled for European 'unity'.

Spade: The Real Snake
20th April 09, 04:07 PM
Didn't he watche Jet Li's Fearless?

Or did he and is pissed that he didn't make that movie?

Robot Jesus
20th April 09, 04:11 PM
I watched "Hero." The point of Hero was that China was such a godawful splintered mess that it simply needed Qin to come and unite them by force, bringing peace and unity to all the warring factions. If this is a common sentiment in China, I can see where Chan is coming from - fear of chaos and social disorder being greater than the fear of government oppression. And many Chinese oldsters most likely still remember the lawlessness that existed before the heavy-handed communist rule took over.


ever seen the emperor and the assassin?

it about how chin was corrupted by his power and needlessly slaughtered thousands.

Quikfeet509
20th April 09, 04:26 PM
Wait, so most mainland Chinese don't want/need somebody to tell them what to do?

Cullion
20th April 09, 04:53 PM
This whole thread is a dark, dark joke. Do you know why?

Because Mainland chinese are more self-reliant and entrepeneurial than any American, or Brit, or Frenchman than most of you have ever met.

Our freedom is illusionary. It's based on a heavily-moderating sounding box which our political elites only notice when trying to figure out how to manipulate it.

Freedom is a side-effect of self-reliance, not visa versa.

Wounded Ronin
20th April 09, 07:07 PM
I watched "Hero." The point of Hero was that China was such a godawful splintered mess that it simply needed Qin to come and unite them by force, bringing peace and unity to all the warring factions. If this is a common sentiment in China, I can see where Chan is coming from - fear of chaos and social disorder being greater than the fear of government oppression. And many Chinese oldsters most likely still remember the lawlessness that existed before the heavy-handed communist rule took over.

Oh, great, now they're licking the O-ring of the Qing dynasty? You mean those guys who were responsible for letting Europe come in and rape China? Including such luminaries as Cixi and Henry Puyi? What is the world coming to?

Sun Wukong
21st April 09, 02:54 AM
Well, I wouldn't say the Qing were entirely responsible for the west coming in and raping the shit out of China.

I think that can pretty much be squarely blamed on England, the Dutch, Spain, Portugal and the U.S. all to varying degrees. Everytime the Qing stood up to them, they rolled in sunk all the ships in the harbor and sacked a major city without breaking a sweat militarily speaking. The Qing were not capable of defeating or even fending off the might of the west's military forces.

Sure, there was a lot of cock suckers trying to line their pockets on the backs of their countrymen, but I doubt that would have made an enormous difference were they properly united.

The Qing Empire simply wasn't strong enough or organized enough to put together a unified front against such a powerful group of adversaries.

taijiamn
21st April 09, 03:05 AM
Oh, great, now they're licking the O-ring of the Qing dynasty? You mean those guys who were responsible for letting Europe come in and rape China? Including such luminaries as Cixi and Henry Puyi? What is the world coming to?

Don't you mean the Qin, not the Qing? Aren't they seperated by oh, 1000 years or so? It's been years since my history class....

socratic
21st April 09, 04:34 AM
Don't you mean the Qin, not the Qing? Aren't they seperated by oh, 1000 years or so? It's been years since my history class....

If I remember my Chinese history from my trip to Xian, the Qin dynasty was founded by one of the baddest warlords around. He united China under a single banner, single script and killed anyone who said or did otherwise to his rule. Also, he killed 700 000 people so no on else could have terracotta soldiers outside their tomb. I doubt he let the Europeans fuck with them considering that was well into the BCs. Huang Di was not someone you wanted to mess with.

The Qing dynasty was the last dynasty of China and was founded by Manchurian interlopers who basically ran the country into the ground. They're probably also responsible for decline of the Manchu language. The Mings, who came before them, were also interlopers (they were ethnically Mongolian; I forget which tribe...), but they apparently did things a lot better than the Qings did.

socratic
21st April 09, 04:46 AM
I watched "Hero." The point of Hero was that China was such a godawful splintered mess that it simply needed Qin to come and unite them by force, bringing peace and unity to all the warring factions. If this is a common sentiment in China, I can see where Chan is coming from - fear of chaos and social disorder being greater than the fear of government oppression. And many Chinese oldsters most likely still remember the lawlessness that existed before the heavy-handed communist rule took over.
That movie was a direct result of the Chinese propaganda machine. Apparently Hong Kong cinema sucks serious ass now that it's under CCP oversight. Pretty much any blockbuster kung fu movie these days is about legitimising the current totalitarian government through thinly-veiled guises.

I begin to wonder if maybe Jackie Chan was co-opted [or paid incredibly handsomely] to do it. He's not the first film star I've seen in propaganda videos. When I was in China, government-sponsored ads [even 'save the animals' adds, which got a surprising amount of screen time] featured celebrities as a default.


Well, I wouldn't say the Qing were entirely responsible for the west coming in and raping the shit out of China.

I think that can pretty much be squarely blamed on England, the Dutch, Spain, Portugal and the U.S. all to varying degrees. Everytime the Qing stood up to them, they rolled in sunk all the ships in the harbor and sacked a major city without breaking a sweat militarily speaking. The Qing were not capable of defeating or even fending off the might of the west's military forces.

Sure, there was a lot of cock suckers trying to line their pockets on the backs of their countrymen, but I doubt that would have made an enormous difference were they properly united.

The Qing Empire simply wasn't strong enough or organized enough to put together a unified front against such a powerful group of adversaries.
You forgot Japan, dude. Meiji's crew fucked China bad. And I'd still point fingers at the last few dynasty for the stupid shit that happened under them. You can't ignore poor leadership. Actually, China pretty much spent the majority of the AD era being fucked in the ass by foreigners (mostly Mongolians...). The only true Chinese left were the seaborn and diasporic communties (since that's where loyalists fled to), and their own government fucked them (all seaborn Chinese were considered pirates for quite a long damn time). Ironically this is the reason why so many Chinese-xyz citizens (of the US, Australia, England, Fiji, etc etc) usually speak Fujian or Cantonese, because those communties were the most entrepeneurial and seaborn.

And Cullion, have you been to China? I have. You can't say certain things in China without the police smashing down your door, even if you're just a tourist. That's the opposite freedom, dude. One of those things is 'falun gong'. I seriously have no idea how you could imagine living in a totalitarian state = freedom even if they totalitarian state has semicapitalist trappings.

Ajamil
21st April 09, 06:47 AM
I took the sentiment as China being too big, too populous, and too rural for people to feel much effect (especially not aid) from the govt.

Quikfeet509
21st April 09, 09:32 AM
If I remember my Chinese history from my trip to Xian, the Qin dynasty was founded by one of the baddest warlords around. He united China under a single banner, single script and killed anyone who said or did otherwise to his rule. Also, he killed 700 000 people so no on else could have terracotta soldiers outside their tomb. I doubt he let the Europeans fuck with them considering that was well into the BCs. Huang Di was not someone you wanted to mess with.

The Qing dynasty was the last dynasty of China and was founded by Manchurian interlopers who basically ran the country into the ground. They're probably also responsible for decline of the Manchu language. The Mings, who came before them, were also interlopers (they were ethnically Mongolian; I forget which tribe...), but they apparently did things a lot better than the Qings did.


Huang Di?


I don't think he even existed - he's one of those immortal leaders that did everything perfectly back in the good ole days. A fairy tale conversation between him and his medical advisor (Qi Bo) is claimed to be the basis of Chinese medicine as supposedly took place 4-5K years ago.


In reality, that book is probably about 2200 years old, Huang Di never existed, and there never were any perfect days when the people lived in harmony with their environment (and lived hundreds of years).

socratic
21st April 09, 06:44 PM
Huang Di?


I don't think he even existed - he's one of those immortal leaders that did everything perfectly back in the good ole days. A fairy tale conversation between him and his medical advisor (Qi Bo) is claimed to be the basis of Chinese medicine as supposedly took place 4-5K years ago.


In reality, that book is probably about 2200 years old, Huang Di never existed, and there never were any perfect days when the people lived in harmony with their environment (and lived hundreds of years).

Sorry, I meant Qin Shi Huang. Wiki seems to think that Qin Shi Huang is synonymous with Huang Di, but I'm not so sure.

Phrost
23rd April 09, 02:14 PM
Freedom is a side-effect of self-reliance, not visa versa.

You're missing one key component: individualism. Culturally, the Chinese are not individualistic, they're collectivists.

The Enlightenment concept of Freedom as we know it is as irrelevant to many of them as Algebra is to the birch tree in my backyard.

mrblackmagic
23rd April 09, 02:17 PM
Then people have to go see his movies, genius!

Meok
23rd April 09, 07:17 PM
You're missing one key component: individualism. Culturally, the Chinese are not individualistic, they're collectivists.

The Enlightenment concept of Freedom as we know it is as irrelevant to many of them as Algebra is to the birch tree in my backyard.

How does this apply to Taiwan and Hong Kong? What about Japan and Korea? I don't think collectivism leads to the irrelevance of political freedom though. Collectivism doesn't mean you don't want to take part in choosing the party/group to lead you.

Looking it at that way many democracies are collectivist. Many people with strong allegiance and identification with one of the few big parties, with most members towing their party line. Then again collectivism/individualism socially does not mean collectivism/individualism in other contexts.

Phrost
23rd April 09, 09:41 PM
There's no such thing as "collective freedom". You're either free as an individual, or the property of a group.

Robot Jesus
23rd April 09, 10:04 PM
"a tyrant who has kept millions clothed and fed for thousands of years is no tyrant"- some Chinese chick I talked to on omegle

Phrost
23rd April 09, 10:14 PM
Exactly.

Robot Jesus
23rd April 09, 10:22 PM
this is the first era for legitimate nationalism in china since.... when exactly did the west start shitting on china?

well it's to be expected that they would start rooting for their team now that it's winning.

Meok
24th April 09, 01:55 AM
There's no such thing as "collective freedom". You're either free as an individual, or the property of a group.

You can have a close knit community where people are interdependent, don't strive to be unique, co-operate rather than compete and have the group form part of their identity, while having political and legal freedoms. Which is why you have examples of collectivist cultures with a lot more political freedom than mainland China such as Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and Korea. Collectivism in politics doesn't tend towards authoritarianism either, as most democracies being dominated by party membership don't tend to tyranny.

Of course there are some people, that feel the people themselves can't be trusted to take part in politics, or that a benevolent dictator is fine. See California's direct democracy, Robot_Jesus' post or the few people from eastern Europe who miss communism. That said wanting less political freedoms is different than being socially or politically collectivist. These different concepts get mixed up when people try to justify authoritarianism through cultural relativity.

HappyOldGuy
24th April 09, 11:00 AM
I'm mildly curious how direct democracy=people can't be trusted to take part in politics.

Other than as evidence maybe.

Lebell
25th April 09, 07:16 AM
There are several problems with freedom as it is perceived in the Western world.

Freedom is being an individual and being in charge of your future or at least having the illusion of being in charge of your future.

Individuals are weak, humans are the most effective in packs or groups.
Look at humans as individuals: they're quite sad little critters.
Person A is great at technical stuff but cant hunt, person B can hunt but is clueless about how to cook, person C can cook but has no farming skills etc etc

The vast majority of people only have one or two skillsets they're good at.
The logical answer is to combine their skills to cover all problems and form an effective society where all can prosper.

But not in the Western world...we got it all figured out, we are individuals and it works great!
People are found lying dead in their homes for 2 months, we chuck old people away in retirement homes where they eventually die rarely seeing their kids because the kids are individuals and need to work on their self deployment.

The basic point on Western freedom is that my freedom ends when it gets in the way of yours.
There's no way in telling really.

There must be a totalitarian government who decides for you.
'Freedom' loving crybabies should get over their infantile ideas.

Shawarma
25th April 09, 07:18 AM
http://sales.starcitygames.com/cardscans/MAG5TH/leviathan.jpg

socratic
25th April 09, 07:38 AM
You can have a close knit community where people are interdependent, don't strive to be unique, co-operate rather than compete and have the group form part of their identity, while having political and legal freedoms. Which is why you have examples of collectivist cultures with a lot more political freedom than mainland China such as Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and Korea. Collectivism in politics doesn't tend towards authoritarianism either, as most democracies being dominated by party membership don't tend to tyranny.

Of course there are some people, that feel the people themselves can't be trusted to take part in politics, or that a benevolent dictator is fine. See California's direct democracy, Robot_Jesus' post or the few people from eastern Europe who miss communism. That said wanting less political freedoms is different than being socially or politically collectivist. These different concepts get mixed up when people try to justify authoritarianism through cultural relativity.

Hong Kong is subject to party oversight. The last say is in the hands of the CCP, there really isn't that much freedom there anymore. And Taiwan will more or less be like that soon too.

Cullion
25th April 09, 07:00 PM
You're missing one key component: individualism. Culturally, the Chinese are not individualistic, they're collectivists.

The Enlightenment concept of Freedom as we know it is as irrelevant to many of them as Algebra is to the birch tree in my backyard.

The Chinese aren't individualistic ? What makes you think that ?

Before communism, they had an advanced state of feudalism with a class system.

Now I think you're talking about the repressed agricultural serfs at the bottom of that heap and extrapolating that to the whole of Chinese culture.

To be honest, I can't see how those serfs were less free than the same economic strata in Europe.

They also had independent land-owners, merchants, pirates, artists and, yes, itinerant hard-drinking swordsman-poets. I can certainly see an individualist strand in their culture.

'Mountains high, emporer far'.

TheMightyMcClaw
5th January 10, 01:50 AM
On the topic of the thunderous collapse of the Qing empire in the 19th century, let's not forget about internal forces:
Like these guys. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Rebellion)
And these guys. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Rebellion)
And these guys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panthay_rebellion), and these guys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungan_revolt).
A lot of bad shit went down in China between the 1850's and 1870's.

Cullion makes some very good points; Communist China right now, in a lot of ways, has much more unrestrained capitalism than the Capitalist USA. It's certainly easier to be a major corporation who stomps on people's rights without government interference; and, from what I hear, it's typically easier to start your own business in China than the US.
As for Phrost's claims that "the Chinese" are all of a collectivistic nature and have no concept of freedom, I cannot fathom how such a sweeping claim could be made of any people. It's like saying the French have no concept of justice, or the !kung have no concept of happiness.
I would also add that a lot of China's literary hero's are extremely individualistic characters who go against the grain; Sun Wukong, Li Kui, Lu Zhishen, even Jia Baoyu.

socratic
5th January 10, 05:08 AM
I suppose the influence of Confucianism has greatly waned over modern Chinese culture thanks to the Communists (who saw it has a literary extension of feudalism), but I would bet there are still vestiges of the premodern collectivist sentimient. Just remember that 'maintaining the peace of the whole of China' is still a great excuse for obliterating anti-government dissenters.

That said, it's not all black and white, naturlich.

You can say that China has a lot more 'freedom' economically, but socially their freedoms are far lesser.... At least when the spies and police are present.

nihilist
5th January 10, 05:27 AM
Can you dance naked in the street?

No?

That doesn't sound like freedom to me.

Sun Wukong
5th January 10, 06:06 AM
I'm going to go down this fucking dead end street again aren't I?

Socratic, you get your social commentary almost strictly from agenda positive sources.

Yes, there are "secret police" in China. I've had dinner with some of them; in fact, one of them went next door to borrow silverware for my mom. They're a whole lot less secret than the DEA in the US. They even wear matching clothes and have almost the same hair cut.

God dude, it's like you read your "facts about china" off the back of cereal boxes.

socratic
5th January 10, 06:37 AM
I'm going to go down this fucking dead end street again aren't I? Yep!


Socratic, you get your social commentary almost strictly from agenda positive sources.
Yes, there are "secret police" in China. I've had dinner with some of them; in fact, one of them went next door to borrow silverware for my mom. They're a whole lot less secret than the DEA in the US. They even wear matching clothes and have almost the same hair cut.

God dude, it's like you read your "facts about china" off the back of cereal boxes.I'll admit I haven't lived there so I wouldn't know much about the day-to-day life beyond what I've read (and what little I saw on my holiday), from people who have or people who know people who have, so I'm not about to challenge you on the social realities there. Still, you yourself are a very obvious apologist (when you want to be... Yeah, I remember that Falun Gung thread) so we should all be at least partially wary of what you say as well.

Still, I think I'd prefer to live in a country where there aren't labour-camps nor where you can be dissapeared nor where even tourists can be arrested for practicing banned religions/cults/whatever.