Because You Never Asked

 

     (With the approach of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, this essay, written back in the early 90’s, becomes quite relevant. It should be read in conjunction with the one to follow, entitled “Moral Olympic Hosts”.)

     The English language is rich in things “Chinese”; Chinese laundry, Chinese fire drill, Chinese home run, Chinese handball (known as “chink“ on the streets of New York), Chinese checkers, Chinese eek and Chinese meek. I’d like to add a new entry to this well nourished list: Chinese Olympics. This happens when a country fully expects to host the Olympic Games and is then denied the opportunity at the very last moment. They are now host to the “Chinese Olympics”.

     In 1993 the International Olympic Committee was ready to choose Beijing as the site of the Olympic Games for the year 2000, henceforth known as the world’s biggest sporting apparel and equipment marketing convention known to man. But China’s road to the Olympics found a bridge out when the United States decided to become the world’s conscience, a role it readily takes on or rejects relevant more to self interest than morality. In this case, it was decided the current Chinese regime is a gang of churlish sots, abusing and enslaving their people and generally being the kind of pugs you wouldn’t want to see your daughter with. My country’s taste in Chinese leadership is somewhat confusing when one considers the last Chinese government it liked was led by one of the most corrupt philanderers around in the person of Chang Kai Chek. But let’s not quibble with such trivialities. The pressure from the world’s biggest economy found resonance on the Committee, who’s interest in the bottom line seems far more developed than their interest in fair play. As a result, those curds from column A were left with egg foo yong on their faces, while those rosy cheeked lads from “down under” got the real thing.

     With the stench of hypocrisy wafting through the air like the smell of a bus station latrine, it must be asked what right the United States has to be anyone’s conscience? Are we to forget that this is the world’s most violent, crime ridden nation, a country where the Smith and Wesson firearms company is making a killing (ha, ha) selling “feminine” handguns to frightened women? Are there more rapes, assaults, armed robberies, burglaries, attempted and committed murders in China than in the good old U.S. of A.? Are the streets of Chicago or New York safer than those of Shanghai or Beijing? Are there more people in prison in this “wicked” Chinese nation than in the good old U.S. of A.?

     China has a population roughly 900 million people greater than the United States. Undoubtedly, if we were to compare the rate of such anti-social activities against each country’s population, the answer to all the above questions would be “no”. But, even if we simply added up the numbers without taking any average “rate” into account, it would not surprise this writer if the answer was still “no”.

     When’s the last time a boy shot someone with a handgun in China? (Considering all the Columbines, Jonesboros, Virginia Techs and more, that have plagued America since this essay was written, this last sentence becomes even more relevant).

     I don’t mean to imply that China is a better country than the United States, a concept surely not accepted by this writer. None of this is meant to show that one country has better food, or wetter sex, or healthier prostates, or cuter, more well behaved children. This essay is not a comparison of the two countries. It is only meant to show we are not looking down on China from any moral high ground, that we don’t have the right to do this given some of the shortcomings of our own culture.

     Let’s get to the pulp of it all and talk about Tiananmen Square, political prisoners and “human rights” abuses, the most specific and recent grievances put forth to prejudice China’s attempt to host The Games.

     It is certainly not my desire to mitigate the actions of the Chinese government with regard to the killings in Tiananmen Square. When push comes to shove and shove comes to incarceration and death, something has broken down and something has to be fixed. But is the United States qualified to be China’s conscience due to these events?

     Having read between the lines (one must truly be somewhat of a professional code breaker in order to decipher the “news”), it seems the unfortunate events culminating in the violence at Tiananmen Square were not the result of some sweeping, massive, popular uprising of a cross section of Chinese society. What it seems to have been is a spirited, certainly valid display (other then the trespassing, public order aspects of such confrontations) of opposition from a substantial part of the student and intellectual community.

     Have we Americans already forgotten the similar agitation experienced during the Vietnam war from the same segment of our society? This dissent led to civil disobedience, violence, arrests, and yes, even to death on that tragic day at Kent State University. Once again, I repeat, I am not passing judgment on the respective actions of the governments involved in these events. All I am doing is questioning our right to be China’s conscience given these circumstances.

     Let’s talk about political prisoners. Most likely, there are people in jail in China due to their opposition to the regime in power, surely a lamentable situation. Yet it is also lamentable that the United States has the world’s largest prison population, in response to which the nation only seems capable of building more prisons. Obviously, one might differentiate between a man in jail for his opposition to the state, and one in jail for murder, robbery, etc. This attitude is not without logic, but it also simplifies the problem. To some extent, all prisoners are “political”. When somebody kills, robs, rapes, embezzles, or commits other anti-social acts, this person is challenging the existing authority. They are saying, “hey, I don’t give a damn about your laws, your government, your ideas of right or wrong. It is a non-intellectual man’s way of challenging the status quo. It is a rebellious act and could very easily be defined as “political”.

     What has just been said above would have much less validity if, as it should be, this criminal activity were confined to a far lesser fraction of our population. If such were the case, such acts could truly be called the work of social deviants deserving strict punishment. But when it has reached the levels it has currently reached in our society, especially in certain widespread environments where criminal acts have almost lost their abnormal character, one has to ask if there is something more cultural in play. In this kind of setting, the crime issue is certainly something political and our last few elections have treated it as such.

     It’s time we started looking more at our own problems than China’s.

     Relevant Material: “It is known that it is practically impossible to know a foreign language intimately, no matter how much one studies it. Wouldn’t it be naïve to believe it an easy task to know the true political reality of a foreign country?” From an essay by one of this century’s most profound thinkers, the Spaniard, Jose Ortega y Gasset.

     “The United States declares that its foreign policy is almost an act of philanthropy. Being that this isn’t and never has been true for any great power, including the United States, nobody really believes that, but the North American gift for self deception drives everyone crazy. They know what kinds of interests are in play, but nobody is allowed to admit it. What they are supposedly doing, unselfishly, of course, is spreading the word of liberty, democracy, and saving everyone else from themselves.” From the novel, “Diana”, by one of the great voices of Latin America, the Mexican, Carlos Fuentes.