It started with Rob asking Helen if she had heard about the semi-recent riots in Tibet. Helen promptly told us that those were a lie, and that BBC and CNN were not showing the truth--that the videos they had were staged and that the officials in the pictures were not Chinese. That's what the Chinese news had told her. We all started arguing about censorship and how China is different from America, Ireland, and other western countries because it censors the news. Rob's and my western ideas were clashing all over the place with Helen and her Chinese upbringing. The topic of Tibet quickly led to the Dalai Lama. Helen told us he is a very bad man... Rob and I (mainly Rob, I mostly listened and commented here and there) explained why the west thinks the Dalai Lama is so great. Helen was surprised and a little upset that we thought so highly of him, and explained why we are wrong and why he is a bad man. Which, of course, once again led back to the topic of Tibet and how Helen thinks that the people there do not know what's best for them and have no right to be free. She talked a lot about how Chinese people think it's better for the government to decide things for them because too many people are not smart enough to make decisions for themselves. Rob was going nuts at this point. Our heated discussions about communism, freedom of speech, Tibet, the Dalai Lama, and a bit about Taiwan lasted through lunch ( we were the last ones who left), and Rob and Helen were still heatedly discussing things when they left to go home to have a rest (I stayed in the office to use the computer).
Rob was going crazy because to us, Helen's views are a direct result of everything that the west considers bad about China. In our minds, lies are told to her by the government as fact, and she believes them wholeheartedly. We think she trusts a corrupt system without understanding how corrupt it is. We think that people have the right to be free and to live how they want, but she thinks that people who want freedom just don't know what's best for them.
I felt really detached throughout the whole argument. Of course I disagree with her, but I recognize that I am a direct result of my upbringing, just as she is a direct result of her upbringing. My western way of thinking will always clash with the way China operates. Who am I to tell Helen that her government is operating the incorrect way? Yes, I think the western way is much better, but the only reason I think that is because that's where I come from and that's what I am brought up to believe.
The heart of the problem is that we're all brought up to think that our country and our way of doing things is the right way and everyone else is just wrong. To Rob and I, the fact that China censors the news and lies to it's people is awful. To us, we have the truth about situations that Helen doesn't know the half of. And yes, to us that's bad.
But is it actually? Do I actually have the right to argue with Helen and explain to her why my system is better than hers? It's all about perspective. There is no absolute right and no absolute wrong. Rob and Helen left arguing about censorship... to us it will always and forever be wrong. But does that mean it is?
Anyway, this afternoon was very eventful. I've only heard about how China shields its people from the truth (should I even use that word?); I've never experienced it firsthand. I still adore Helen... the arguing to me is very separate. And I think that three young people discussing politics, government, right, and wrong is never a bad thing.
On an unrelated note, I salivate whenever I picture a cold glass of skim milk.
Oh, milk. How I miss you.
~
And, as always, some pictures (better ones to upload soon):
My class, working hard (um, or hardly working).
Alex, a stellar drawer, showing off his picture of the four seasons (I taught weather awhile ago).
Rob and his girls. They swarm him. I mean that. Swarm. Sometimes they swarm me, but no, mostly just him.
4 comments:
hey emma,
that was a very neat story yo just shared! I would've loved to been there. My question is that do you think there are absolute rights that every human being should have? something that goes beyond government, for instance freedom to access the "truthful" information. I can just see you three people arguing as if locke and machiavelli were sitting down for lunch.
hmmm--some good food for thought.
one comment: i definitely think there's a difference between discussion and argument, yes? there's always room for discussion, or else you would've missed getting this entire point of view of how china encourages its people to think and what to believe--that's key. you can be engaged without placing your beliefs on others, though it is indeed tricky when you should try.
After reading this I was mostly very frustrated with Rob. On this whole topic I'm really influenced by reading Robinson Crusoe, if u've read it you may have noticed a very big part of the book is his interaction with the natives and he completely disregards their culture, their beliefs, their form of ruling, everything, throws it out as useless and teaches them blankly what he knows is civilized as is right. It's painful to read! I literally skipped pages in that book.
Rob should be careful how he credits the way he lives and discredits Helen. I of course expect u, Em, to be intellectual on this issue and it sounds like you were. People can get heated over this stuff and it can lead bad places. Neither Rob nor Helen can fully understand which system is better, and which leads to which goal better. Which makes people happier? Which makes a more productive system? Better economy? Who knows.
I come up with similar issues comparing Israel vs Iran or other Islam-based countries. Each country is so proud at its own system.
wow... so anthropology 101 right here :)
Post a Comment