The Human Wave

The plot to embarrass China is going well.

Torch relay a ‘public relations nightmare’ – CNN.com
“Despite nearly a year of planning and the deployment of 2,000 officers, the Metropolitan Police were unable to stop protesters breaking through the security cordon at vulnerable points,” the Times reported.

“It was a public relations nightmare for London, with images of Tibetans pinned to the tarmac by police, and demonstrators waving placards outside Downing Street.” Photo Watch a gallery of the torch relay in London »

The Daily Telegraph said the relay was nearly abandoned because of the “ugly and chaotic” scenes.

“Organizers, including Chinese officials, discussed “pulling out” of the day-long relay after just a few hours, as police fought running battles with wave after wave of anti-China protesters,” the newspaper reported.

The Daily Telegraph said police were surprised by the “relentless” attempts to disrupt the parade at “every corner” of the route.

The Mail said the relay turned into a “sinister and slapstick” event “which did Britain no favor in the eyes of the world.”

“Terrified athletes and celebrities carrying the torch were forced to run for cover,” it reported. Video Watch supporters, opponents of the Beijing Olympics show up at the London leg of the torch relay »

Downing Street was privately furious as the embarrassing fiasco — costing $2 million and likened to “Chinese police state tactics” in London — was beamed around the world on TV.”

The Mail described the Chinese guards helping escort the flame as a “mysterious private army.”

But some context of why this embarrasment is needed, and why processing it is hard for many Chinese.

In a thread, December wrote:

The Tibet issue is a very complicated historical and cultural problem, since 1300 ago, Tibet and Chinese had closed relationship from intermarriage to culture reform from Han and Tibet. It is a problem that started from inappropriate way of how Chinese government tried to bring something good but actually culturally-religiously insensitive way to treat Tibet people, and then the problem arose and finally big in later 19th century. The government has something to apologize, but this is not a simple game like most of your comments wrote, one country invade another, etc.,

December’s right. The situation is very complicated, and many of the problems in Tibet have their in past mistakes — both well-intentioned and poorly-intentioned.

Properly, from 1644 to 1912 the provinces of China combined to form one of the political units in the Empire of the Great Qing. The Han of the Chinese provinces were the most numerous race, and thus feared and oppressed by all the others. Other political units of the Great Qing were Manchuria, Mongolia, Turkestan, and Tibet. While the Manchuria-based Qing would eventually Hanize over time, to the end intermarriage between Han and other races were forbidden, non-Han garrisons were in every large town, Han officials were required to be monitored by a feather-bedded inspector from another race, areas outside of the Chinese provinces were closed to Han settlement, and communications from the Qing court were written both in Chinese characters and Manchurian (a script related to Hebrew).

Thus, when the Qing were overthrown in 1912, China effectively went through a process of decolonization — similar to the transition of Southern Rhodesia to Zimbabwe in the 1970s and 1980s. The race laws were ended, which led to the rapid swamping of most minorities. Inner Manchuria was the first to be settled (outer Manchuria since absorbed by Russia), and then Inner Mongolia (the Russians creating an Outer Mongolian puppet state soon after the Revolution), and lastly Inner Turkestan (Outer Turkestan, once again, having been absorbed by Russia). Inner Tibet was likewise swamped, though Outer Tibet (nearly absorbed into the Indian Empire at one point), high on its plateau, was resistant to non-genetically-optimized settlers, and so remains largely Tibetan to this day.

China would see many disasters between the Revolution of 1912 and Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms seventy years later. Many Chinese people judge their nation’s evolution as largely a matter of the difference in life between then and now. In 1912, there was institutional racism, widespread poverty, and national weakness: now there is a racially equal society, growing wealth, and national strength. Using the same standards on Tibet, in 1912 it was a feudal state: now Tibet is economically connected to the world and is enjoying sustained economic growth.

China deserves praise for elevating the material living standards of Tibetans, as well as creating a more just society throughout. In many ways, China has a smart and sophisticated government that is focusing on keeping the country together during a time of economic transition and growth.

A major exception to the Chinese government’s sophistication is its backwards strategy on Tibet. The Communist Party is able to subtly handle city-countryside conflict, and international border disputes, in a way that deescalates conflict and promotes economic development and growth. That is, everywhere but Tibet. In Tibet, the Communist Party’s strategy is still to kill and terrify a population into submission.

There are indications that the embarrassment is working. Articles like 為西藏問題尋找最大公約數 (Find a Common Denominator on the Tibet Issue) analyze the Tibet problem not as separatists-vs-patriots, but as a case of cultural conflict poorly managed.

It is important that the Communist Party move beyond their old-fashioned method of social repression in Tibet, and find a way to create a more “harmonious society.” China is too important to fail. Those who support the good that China is doing, both inside China and outside it, should help the Communist Party recognize their failure in Tibet, so in the future they can succeed.

“Public relations disasters,” like the protests against the Olympic Torch in London, are a great start.

Eugenics and Dysgenics

There is no such thing as a gene-neutral social policy. Through its creation and application of laws, every government is engaged in either a de facto eugenics (improvement of ) or dysgenics (degradation of) the national genome*. Currently, much of the United States has a distributed dysgenics program in place, where murder (removal from the genepool) is effectively rewarded through slaps-on-the-wrist that confer social status but do not confer net punishment:

Gothamist: 13-Year-Old Arrested in Columbia Student’s Death
A 13-year-old boy was arrested and charged with second-degree manslaughter in the Friday night death of a Columbia graduate student. According to a Daily News source, the boy bragged to his 15-year-old friend before chasing Ming-Hui Yu, “Look what I do to this one.”

The teen and his friends apparently hassled Yu, a 24-year-old Ph.D. student in statistics and a teaching fellow, at the median at Broadway and 122nd Street. The Post reports one “punched him in the face, while the other kept watch.” (The Daily News adds that the police are “don’t believe it was robbery. It was some sort of altercation.”–Yu still had his wallet and backpack.) In an attempt to escape them, Yu ran into the street, where he was hit by a Jeep. Yu later died of his injuries.

I’m not sure what the track record on microevolution on a national scale is, but it’s certainly worth investigating. How many critics of laissez-faire economics likewise oppose laissez-faire dysgenics?

[* Technically a genome is mapped to an individuals, so there is no “national genome.” Still, the species concept is a myth too, but we talk about “the human genome” because it is understood that means both the mean properties of the genome as well as common variation within it.]

I’m frigging Noam Chomsky

In an online discussion about TibetPedia, a website with the following headline:

If Tibet is separated from China …

People lose their homes, students quit their colleges, and couples get separated
Don’t spend the rest of your life blaming yourself

This snippet:

与乔姆斯基关于西藏的对话,及关于www.tibetpedia.org网站的建 – 未名空间(mitbbs.com)
3 NoamChomsky (2 days ago)
My friend, I’ve often been accused of being naive, but never simple. I do know a thing or two of history and politics; they’ve been an avocation of mine for a little while now.

Of course I’m keenly aware of the misdemeanors perpetrated by the US on behalf of its cynical and corrupt government, and I’ve protested them loudly for decades. I’m friggin Noam Chomsky, have you heard of me? Apparently not.

I can’t verify that it’s from the real Noam Chomsky, but later parts of the conversation:

First, I’m sorry; I wrote in haste. I should not have said China is “fascist” as that’s technically incorrect. I should have said “repressive,” ” tyrannical,” and “implacably hostile to the human spirit.” I think we can agree those terms are much less offensive than “fascist” so please accept my apologies.

Second, I do not share your antipathy to “anarchy” or rather, your implied preference for the centralized State. Your implication that lack of governance would lead to genocide neglects the plain fact that most (but admittedly not all) of the genocides of the last hundred years were meticulously planned and executed by sovereign states.

Two last things: first, my heritage and religious beliefs are not germane to this discussion. And second, it’s unnecessary to write “Midnat Yisra’el” in Hebrew if you’re not going to call China “Zhongguo” or “中國” (“中国”). Let’s not show off.

Certainly imply it is.

An argument between Chomsky and a Communist apologist has all the fascination of a debate between partisans of Kim Jung Il and Pol Pot. Read the whole thing.