A Guest Essay by a lady poster from Mainland

节录自: �伟《时现代化与历�教课书》

20世纪中国人干了�少“无法无天�的事，义和团事件是其中的典型。值得�视的是�但至今有人把野蛮的行为说�是“�命�，而且到了20世纪90年代，有人竟把主张�守现行国际�约的观点视为应该严加批判的�国投�观点�

说到底，这是把�命粗鄙化的�毒。

必须清醒地看到，在社会领域，�有引�制度��的行动，�称得上真正的�命。太平天国和义和团都�符�这个�求。这样的歪曲实际是把�命粗鄙化，迟早总�付出代价。

ä¸?能轻视这些错误教育的å?Žæžœã€‚è¿?å??常识ç?†æ€§ï¼Œä»¥â€œé?©å‘½â€?çš„å??义故æ„?歪曲历å?²çœŸç›¸ï¼Œæ­Œé¢‚义和团的直接æ?¶æžœåœ¨â€œæ–‡åŒ–大é?©å‘½â€?中就暴露无é?—。红å?«å…µç?«çƒ§è‹±å›½ä»£åŠžå¤„，是义和团行动的翻版；“破四旧â€?和“å??å¸?â€?ã€?“å??ä¿®â€?中体现的清除外æ?¥äº‹ç‰©çš„疯狂，这些行动体现的内在ç?†è·¯ï¼Œä¹Ÿä¸Žä¹‰å’Œå›¢çš„“ç?­æ´‹â€?如出一辙。

上述教科书的编写所呈现的�路，也没有什么��。它们的共�点是：1.现有的中�文化至高无上。2.外�文化的邪�，侵蚀了现有文化的纯�。3.应该或�以用政�或暴民专制的暴力去清除�想文化领域的邪�。用这样的�路潜移默化我们的孩�，�管主观�图如何，都是��宽宥的戕害。

为了培育�性的有法治观念的现代公民，以利于现代化事业，现在是纠正这些谬误的时候了。

This is an excerpt from an article titled “Modernization and History Textbooks� By Yuan Weishi. The article was published in the magazine Freezing Point. Please see below for an English translation.

English Translation of excerpt from “Modernization and History Textbooks� By Yuan Weishi

During the 20th centuries, people in China have done many "illegal" things. The Boxer incident is one example. The important thing to note is that there are still people who regard those barbarous activities as "revolution." In the 90's of the twentieth century, there are still people who regard the viewpoint of abiding by international treaties as treasonous surrender that ought to be seriously denounced!

In the end, this is still the poisonous residue of the vulgarization of revolution.

We must wake up and see that in the social domain, the true revolution is one that causes the system to be revolutionized. The Celestial Kingdom of Peace and the Boxers do not fit this requirement. These distortions actually vulgarize the revolution and there will be a price to be paid later on.

You should not underestimate the consequences of this mis-education. It is against commonsense and rationality to distort the historical truth in the name of the "revolution" and the direct ill effects of praising the Boxers were exposed during the Cultural Revolution. The Red Guard setting fire to the British consulate is the replica of the Boxers' action; the mania to eliminate all foreign things in the "Anti-Four Olds," "Anti-Imperialism" and "Anti-Revisionism" campaigns had the same logic as the Boxers' desire to destroy the foreigners.

The logic presented in the above textbooks is no different. Their common points are: 1. The current Chinese culture is superior and unmatched. 2. Outside culture is evil and corrodes the purity of the existing culture. 3. We should or could use political power or the dictatorship of the mob to violently erase all the evil in the field of cultural thinking. To use these kinds of logic in order to quietly exert a subtle influence on our children is an unforgivable harm no matter what the objective intent was.

In order to cultivate modern citizens with rational thoughts based upon the rule of law for the modernization project, now is the moment to correct those errors.

_________________________________________________________
Both Chinese original and English translation care of ESWN: http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20060126_1.htm

FatCat, appreciate your translation. Allows us to see how twisted minds work.

But what was Pansy saying in this post? Maybe a two-sentencer? Thanks

Panzi's post is essentially, "the Chinese people cannot be conquered because they aren't scared to fight back and kill foreigners. Killing foreigners is patriotic."
Never found it so simple to summarize an article before.
He points out that the number of Chinese killed by foreigners far exceeds the number of foreigners killed by Chinese... what I'd like to know is, how about the number of Chinese killed by fellow Chinese? :oops: Panzi and other such pansies are always glad to sweep such inconvenient facts under the carpet and continue with their xenophobic revelry.

Lightyear, you are definitely right. A brief summary of panzi’s posting will put everything into perspective. The article that panzi quoted defends the action taken by the Boxers. From the author’s point of view, the Boxers Incident was the fault of, guess who, the WESTERNERS, of course. The Boxers are described here as heroes defiant of oppression and persecution imposed by, guess who, the WESTERNERS, of course. According to this author, Chinese people today have to thank the Boxers for their struggle against foreign occupation. Without the Boxers, China would have fallen into the hands of, guess who, the evil WESTERNERS, of course. The author reckons the Boxers Incident was a very important event in history of struggle against foreign occupation. The killing of foreigners was the simplest and most straight forward way for Chinese nationals to express their hatred towards, guess who, the WESTERNERS, of course.

This is my translation and if panzi doesn’t like it, then stiff shit. That’s the problem if you don’t provide an English translation.

By the way, lightyear, I didn’t translate Yuan Weishi’s article. The translation was taken from ESWN.

There is some basis for the fury of the Boxers against foreign occupation. In the Shandong and Zhili regions especially, Catholic missionaries like those from the Divine Word were particularly invasive of local religious institutions and cultures. Also, the building of foreign railroads and telegraphs did cause massive job loss to the Chinese, and there is no doubt that foreign spheres of influence were degrading and exploitative.

However, in general the Boxers weren't being anti-imperialists or nationalists, which is one of those myths championed by Chinese historians in the service of state propaganda. What is imperialism, after all, to a peasant? (And no, that's not a dig against peasants.) The Boxers movement was at its heart more anti-poverty, anti-drought, anti-famine and anti-unemployment than anything. When your survival is at stake, your brain does screwy things to you, and you start to look for easy answers as to why it just won't rain in the fields. Foreigners, especially Christian foreigners, made for convenient scapegoats.

Also, like kevin alluded to, in the end the Boxers killed more Christian Chinese than they did Westerners. If that's not screwed-up for a movement that wanted to exterminate the foreigners I don't know what is.

ETA: From Weishi's article:

I actually disagree with this. I think the Taiping rebellion, unlike the Boxer rebellion, was a social revolution.

Such intelligent posts, in response to such a stupid article. Thanks Nausicaa, Kevin, Fat Cat (and any others I might be missing). Oh, and thanks to Panzi for being the catalyst for such good stuff.

Panzi obviously hasn't been reading the right history books.

Ignoring WWII, which was different because it was uncomonly genocidal. China has largely acted to integrate with its conquerors or to ignore them, rather than to fight them.

There might be a few small rebellions now and then, and even some wars, but your everyday Chinese is far more pragmatic than that.

Look at the Mongol invaders. X hundred years ago they were invading foreign savages. Now Chinese regard them as being one of China's ethnic groups and their history as being Chinese history.

Similarly, many groups who are now thought of as being just other Chinese ethnic groups were once seperate people with seperate kings and kingdoms, but and their history has been amalgamated into 'Chinese History' and everybody is seen as being one big happy family.

Much later, when the whites came from Europe, sure they anexed large sections of China, but China muttered behind their backs and got on with the business of trading with them far more often than it actually tried to kick thm out.

Look at Hong Kong and Shanghai. They were 'owned' by foreigners but they would have fallen apart in a second if it were not for all of the pragmatic Chinese who saw that it was better to trade with them than to live without them or fight them.

Even in Manchuria, the history of whole Japanese communities is now considered to be Chinese history, even though the people playing it out were not ethnicly Chinese and were not there with good intentions towards China.

Chinese integrate and assimilate anybody who invades them and then either makes them Chinese or meets them half way.

This is why China endures, it might not be able to defeat everybody, but the sheer power of China overwhelms all invaders eventually, even if it is not done with the sword.

Panzi hasn't been reading the right history books because he's not just an ultraconservative reactionary, he's an ultraconservative reactionary from the 1860s.

The other day, Panzi suggested that China should stop blaming moder day Japan for its past attrocities because they are both 'Asian Brothers' and that they should get together and tag-team America.

Sometimes he sounds more like me than I do.

He says that he's Mainland, but he sure sounds like an overseas Chinese to me.

Maybe he's from one of those pro-unification Taiwanese family who moved to San Francisco's China town in the 60s who never step outside in to 'America proper'.

One of those people who believe China's faults are because 'it doesn't try hard enough' and that Taiwan will rule a united China one day.

You think Panzi hopes Taiwan will rule a united China one day?

Not really.

I'm saying that Panzi probably grew up in a nationalist Chinese-American houshold that had little real contact with communist China or any real understanding of the fundimentals of life on the mainland.

I think he's funny.

Funny haha or funny uh'oh?

If I read your comment correctly, the latter.