By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: I found most Chinese are quite gullible.
OK, for example.
When they hear HK and Taiwan is China, they believe. They believe it so deeply that if the whole world admit them as independent land.
Even some Chinese I met abroad and even they understand all these passport difference.
What a success,China government!
10 years 6 weeks ago in Arts & Entertainment - China
Hong Kong is part of China, without a doubt. After the opium war, HK was ceded to England for 99 years. In that 99 years, HK flourished while China was embroiled in their own civil wars and closing itself to the world. So on 1st July 1997, HK was returned to China.
As for Taiwan, it's a different story. China considers Taiwan a renegade province, the reason why Taiwan is not part of some world bodies such as the WTO. The constant politicking between the US and China will continue as both refuse to give way.
For the Chinese people, they believe what the local news report. Plus the nationalistic feelings makes the situation more tenuous. It's a very tricky situation because while the world may want to recognize Taiwan as a separate sovereign nation, they do not want to antagonize China. That results in a Mexican stand off which will last for a while.
The majority of Chinese in the mainland has very little knowledge about the outside world. Most of what they know is based on hearsay and what the local news report. I don't blame them.
It's not gullibility, it's brainwashing.
We're all brainwashed at some point, about different things and for different purposes, but ultimately most of us carry hard coded beliefs that hardly pass reality checks. I'll let you think about your own bias, I certainly have mine. It's all about perspective.
From the perspective of a Chinese, mainland China is already a territory full of inequalities and disparities. The Hukou system, for example, will decide who gets to settle in one place, and at what condition. It also decides what type of citizen you are and your level of education, directly influencing where you will live and on what conditions as well. There are clear rankings among cities, and if there are no physical borders, one will surely feel the administrative border. Moving upstream isn't an easy task, even with money nowadays. Then you have places, like the whole Tibet, with several border checks, yet it is China. Where does that happen elsewhere in the world?
So, having all that in mind, growing up in an environment where this is normality, then it really doesn't take much to make one assimilate as a fact that HK and Taiwan are "part of mainland", just with "another of those layers of disparities".
When the Chinese hit a harsh reality they refuse to admit as such, they will find their way around it, usually with the words "Chinese characteristics". This is why how hardcore capitalism ends up described as "socialism with Chinese characteristics", and Hong Kong ends up being "one country two systems".
Burak43:
Mostly agree, but China is not "hardcore capitalist" in any way.
RiriRiri:
Depends on how you would define it. Technically, it's a bureaucracy with a small oligarchy on top, with state owned capitalism for all the crucial industries and de-facto wild liberalism at the bottom end of the food chain. A mess to define. But conceptually, it's > people at the service of > the market at the service of > money at the service of > the oligarchs at the service of > their own survival. Let's find a word for that. Anyhow, we can argue on capitalism, but we surely agree that it's not socialism by any definition of the term.
louischuahm:
Riri@ Good synopsis. Well thought out. I agree with what you said.
Burak43:
Well, you can't have capitalism without property rights, and state capitalism has always seemed like an oxymoron to me. I agree China isn't socialist either (and sure as hell not communist)
One professor back home said China is national socialist. With strong state involvement in key sectors (aviation, telecom, oil etc). Also some free-ish enterprise lower down and some property privileges (not rights) tolerated for the good of the country and not on any moral grounds. Also strong focus on the nation and national unity. An argument against this though is that the state welfare is much less important than what is expected from national socialist societies.
Scandinavian:
Of course you can have capitalism without property rights. It's just not as fair as with property rights.
I have previously uttered
Chinese find it easy to believe but difficult to trust, whereas I find it difficult to believe but easy to trust. ("I" could be other westerners than me I guess)
Example. Mobile phones. People believe they are harmful (radiation blah blah blah) but do not trust science saying it isn't (non-ionising radiation blah blah blah)
Let me quote my favorite scientist here (from memory)
"People think the criterion for believing in something is whether it feels good. That that's the measure of truth, that it makes you feel good. That is a recipe for disaster. It's the ostrich with the head in the sand.".
Critical thinking skills are lacking, people cannot figure out right from wrong, propaganda from reality.
Don't mistake ignorance for gullibility. A specific worldview has been enforced upon Chinese people. They can't deny their "reality" any more than you can deny gravity. The state has done a very good job of defining truth for the general populace. This is quite different from being naturally gullible. The Chinese are not quick to believe anything. They are quick to believe what they are told to believe and there is a fast growing population of netizens who have wizened up to it. Next generation of leaders will be different.
