I do agree however that the level of empathy in the parts of china that I have visited seem to be much lower than I’ve seen elsewhere. I agree with Kai about the reasons behind people not acting in many of the situations given as examples, though I disagree heavily the reasoning behind one arguement. In a life or death situation where a person is trapped if a person where to truly empathise if they believed they could help and save that individuals life no matter the financial/ legal risk then surely at least one person would overcome their fear and act. i.e It could be me trapped there and I would want someone to help me so I will act.Easy to say perhaps…

on the westernization-vs modernization debate( really enjoyed reading the posts)I’d say there are signs of westernization coming through not just superficial ones of dress and eating habits;but also the adoption of ‘western’ words and concepts into hanzi that did not exist before in the 80’s (language helps to define how people think by adding foreign concepts and ideas you can’t help but shift some peoples thinking) , the shifting of moral standards on acceptable behaviour as mentioned before by someone, old traditions being left behind… I could go on but I want to balance this a bit, with the reverse has also been true and one wonders how much of what we think of western has been drawn from elsewhere. I think the use of developed countries rather than western might get rid of some of the baggage. Sorry this is all a bit messy too tired. Last but not least I think a one party country is perfectly possible and can be more efficient than democracy in a fluid or overly large environment. To encapsulate so much power in so few however necessitates that you can get rid of corruption, enforce all laws equally and make sure the people in power are intelligent and compassionate or at least be Just, otherwise it will eventually become oppresive. Human nature here does tend to make that inevitable. The good thing about democracy as a system is it tends to take into account the corruption, stupidity and a selfserving nature in its leaders and in most cases corrects before things can get too bad. If it doesn’t democracy ends and well..

You called Shin a mind boggling idiot for making a comment that you “fully understand and identify with”.

I called shin a mind boggling idiot for make an indefensible statement, not for making a comment I “fully understand and identify with.” I do not “fully understand and identify” with the idiocy required to say something as patently absurd as “empathy is simply non-existent in China.” You’re intentionally misrepresenting my objection.

So why did you sidestep the issue and roll with a childish insult instead?

I didn’t side-step the issue. I clearly bolded and explained what I was objecting to and insulting. You’re intentionally misrepresenting my position yet again.

I know, I know… because it is offensive and not worth a proper response;

I offered a proper response. I explained why the indefensible statement I objected to was false and idiotic when it became apparent that you couldn’t accept that such an indefensible statement could be criticized because it resonates with you.

Instead of making a valid argument against my explanation of why shin’s statement was idiotic and indefensible, you proceeded to defend it by broadening the issue and making hypocritical self-righteous attacks against me, accusing me of having a phobia the record does not evidence me having.

Instead of acknowledging the indefensible as indefensible, you went on the attack, making unfounded and unsupported accusations about my character.

If people like you (someone who knows about China and is ready to tackle cultural issues) can’t address a point that thousands of visitors here “fully understand and identify with” then what the hell kind of issues are you tackling with your comments?

Wow, when did you suddenly know what “thousands of visitors here” think and become qualified to speak on their behalf?

The issue I was tackling with my initial comment to shin was that such a patently idiotic comment is offensive, not appreciated, and liable to be called out for what it is.

The issue I am tackling with my subsequent comments to you is that your disingeneous, misrepresenting, hypocritical, self-righteous, fallacious attacks against me are, well, disingenous, misrepresentive, hypocritical, self-righteous, and fallacious. I think I’ve done a good job above providing evidence and argumentation supporting this conclusion.

That’s why I called you bland earlier,

Right, you can’t figure out how to counter my argument so you call me boring instead. That’s new.

because you never actually deal with the big issues head on.

Only according to you. Or have you become the arbiter of what is a “big issue”? I do not exist to deal with the issues YOU think are “big.” I deal with the issues that matter to me. Your self-righteousness manifests itself yet again with you dictating what other people should consider important or not.

You microscope and de-contextualise stories as part of your phobia of generalisations and fear of being guilty of the crime of feeling superior to China.

That sounded intelligent but it wasn’t. You’re still making the “phobia” accusation without substantiation. Pointing out that a comment made was patently idiotic is not microscoping or de-contextualizing anything. It’s calling a cigar a cigar. You’re still desperately trying to broaden the issue.

But in doing so, you negate the opportunity to look at the bigger picture here in China. There is a bigger picture, and generalistions can and do serve a function other than racism (I admit it is difficult in a country more resembling a continent).

You’re broadening and veering off topic. I have nothing against looking at the bigger picture here in China. I have nothing against reasonably used generalizations. I DO have something against people copping a superiority complex. shin’s comment indicated such. His subsequent defense corroborated it. I’ve already demonstrated how you have a nauseating superiority complex as well above.

Shin’s comment might have been offensive, but the issue itself WAS worthy of a proper response.

I gave a proper response and had good discussions with those who were able to discuss the issue without being patently offensive and then defending such offensiveness. You’re still broadening.

It’s the same thing with your CNreview blog, which serves as another example of your misleading people and avoiding the larger issues. You rightly observe that foreign people very rarely have Chinese friends (which so many are not ready to admit), but then go on to write an entirely innocuous blog reminding people who came to integrate that they should review their current situation. I mean.. WTF kind of point is that? Why would that make interesting reading?

What isn’t interesting to you doesn’t mean it isn’t interesting to others. How arrogant can you be to think that your tastes and interests define everyone elses?

I didn’t think it was necessary to lecture foreigners to make Chinese friends. 1. I don’t think they need to.
2. If they want to, a simple reminder that they think about their situation, consider their original goals, and then maybe make different decisions going forward is sufficient in my mind for my purposes.

Your criticism of CNR is the lamest argument I’ve seen you make yet. Now, maybe YOU don’t think these are big issues, but I’ve written about racism in China, Jackie Chan’s comments on the Chinese needing to be “controlled”, freedom of speech on the internet, biases and prejudices towards the movie Nanjing Nanjing, and Tiananmen Square amongst others. Do I need to tell you how “big” these issues are? Or are you going to dismiss them all because it is more convenient for your argument to do so? Or because you might not agree with my position on these issues?

So anything you disagree with is automatically not a “big” issue, eh?

(Any readers still following this should note that Kai did later admit that this blog was ‘probably a trap’ in response to the MANY people who ‘misread’ it. This is one of the reasons why I called him a troll – Wiki definition of troll is someone who has the “primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response”)

Wow, if you mistake an provocative introduction that segways into a larger point as trolling, you’re a bigger idiot that I though. I am, however, glad you finally looked up what “troll” means. I hope you’ll now realize that the vast majority of my comments on this website are is not “trollish” behavior. Likewise, various writing techniques used to engage or prompt a reaction from a reader is not trolling. Keep reading that Wikipedia definition.

It was the same on the ‘woman drowns in car’ story. You get red-faced and shout at people who cite it as an example of how Chinese people don’t help each other when in trouble, and in doing so, completely fail to take up a very obvious phenomenon here, which is the fact that people often don’t help each other.

Ah, I was waiting for when you’d bring that up. You’re basically demanding that I have the same thoughts and reactions as you do. This is ridiculous. I already made my point in that thread. I’m not going to re-argue my point here. You’re again broadening and trying to change the subject instead of simply acknowledging that I have the right and freedom to take offense to what shin said but you’re trying to force me to accept it. I don’t need to accept what I find unacceptable, even if you demand it, Asis.

You want to fight against oversimplifications; fine, but please don’t do it at the expense of honest discussion about China.

You’re not very good at honest discussions, Asis. When someone starts an honest discussion, I’ll honor it with an honest discussion. What shin did was not an honest discussion, thou you apparently think so and demand that I agree. When others like bert or pug started honest discussions, I was happy to engage them on it. You’re again depending on broadening the issue in order to make a criticism against me that isn’t applicable.

You’re trying to blackmail me into accepting offensive comments, claiming that if I don’t, then I’m wasting an opportunity for an honest discussion. That’s some fucked up logic, Asis. The person who squandered the opportunity for an honest discussion is the person who first made the patently idiotic and indefensible statement. How does someone engage shin in an honest discussion when he already came out saying “empathy is simply non-existent in China?” When confronted and called out, he then defends it? I’m supposed to have an honest discussion with someone who is more interested in casting judgement and condemnation, reaffirming his own ethnic/racial/cultural superiority? Sorry, Asis, you’re defending the wrong example and picking the wrong battle. An honest discussion begins with mutual respect. Why is it that you’re arguing that I should accord shin respect when he offered none?

Are you one of those people who think foreigners and foreign opinions should be sincerely considered and accepted no matter how offensive they are?

Instead of deliberately evading and misleading just to prove your point that foreigners feel superior to the Chinese, why not spend some time actually tackling these issues?

Because I don’t owe it to you to play by your ridiculously unfair rules. Instead of deliberately trying to assert superiority over the Chinese, why not spend some time actually tackling these issues? See how it works, Asis?

It would make you a hell of a better writer;

Um, yeah, I don’t think I’m very interested in being a “better writer” in your eyes.

“I’m not Shin’s fucking parent”

I can almost hear you shouting it at your screen. This Kai, is exactly what I am talking about. There’s a fire inside you that affects your ability to speak pragmatically and maturely about China. To address the things that really matter.

You called Shin a mind boggling idiot for making a comment that you “fully understand and identify with”. That’s what I took you up on, and who can blame me for misunderstanding you, given your strange use of words?

You favour calling people names (misleading names at that) for making generalisations, rather than taking up observations that you “fully understand and identify with”. A lot of us did, like you, “fully understand and identify” with Shin’s statement. So why did you sidestep the issue and roll with a childish insult instead?

I know, I know… because it is offensive and not worth a proper response; but that was, and is my point. If people like you (someone who knows about China and is ready to tackle cultural issues) can’t address a point that thousands of visitors here “fully understand and identify with” then what the hell kind of issues are you tackling with your comments?

That’s why I called you bland earlier, because you never actually deal with the big issues head on. You microscope and de-contextualise stories as part of your phobia of generalisations and fear of being guilty of the crime of feeling superior to China. But in doing so, you negate the opportunity to look at the bigger picture here in China. There is a bigger picture, and generalistions can and do serve a function other than racism (I admit it is difficult in a country more resembling a continent).

Shin’s comment might have been offensive, but the issue itself WAS worthy of a proper response.

It’s the same thing with your CNreview blog, which serves as another example of your misleading people and avoiding the larger issues. You rightly observe that foreign people very rarely have Chinese friends (which so many are not ready to admit), but then go on to write an entirely innocuous blog reminding people who came to integrate that they should review their current situation. I mean.. WTF kind of point is that? Why would that make interesting reading?

(Any readers still following this should note that Kai did later admit that this blog was ‘probably a trap’ in response to the MANY people who ‘misread’ it. This is one of the reasons why I called him a troll – Wiki definition of troll is someone who has the “primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response”)

It was the same on the ‘woman drowns in car’ story. You get red-faced and shout at people who cite it as an example of how Chinese people don’t help each other when in trouble, and in doing so, completely fail to take up a very obvious phenomenon here, which is the fact that people often don’t help each other.

You want to fight against oversimplifications; fine, but please don’t do it at the expense of honest discussion about China. Instead of deliberately evading and misleading just to prove your point that foreigners feel superior to the Chinese, why not spend some time actually tackling these issues? It would make you a hell of a better writer; and at the same would save me and MANY others from ‘misinterpreting’ your meaning and thinking that you are deliberately ignoring the relevant features in this society.

Kidding! I’m on Kai’s side here. For the most part his points are solid, his complaints valid and any criticisms that I’ve seen him make are, frankly, deserved. Keep going Kai.

I’m sorry Kai, but I’m just gonna have to cut through a lot of this because…I literally don’t have time to get back to you on all the points you have made.

This is a problem, Asis, because at best it suggests you haven’t been bothering to read my points before you make some silly argument against me based upon your mistaken preconceptions of me and my position. At worst, this is just a convenient way for you to ignore and sidestep the counterpoints raised against your accusations. Now, having read your comment, I already know I’m going to spend the next few blockquotes and responses just restating your mistakes, oversights, and misrepresentations.

What I can do though, is take us right to the root of why I take up your comments rather than other people’s. It’s this phobia you have of people pointing out the negative things about China with the predisposition you have that it is ALL due to foreign arrogance.

I have no problem with people pointing out the negative things about China as many other comments I have personally made and agreed with on this website clearly demonstrate. I DO have a problem with foreign arrogance, just as I have a problem with Chinese arrogance.

In another topic, you ask why I don’t blast the Chinese commenters of the comments translated by Fauna as “mind boggling idiocy” for their oversimplified generalizations. In reality, I’ve actually occassionally commented on it before, but generally, the reason I don’t respond to them is because those people are unlikely to see my response here on chinaSMACK. I bother to respond to commenters on chinaSMACK because there’s a reasonable probability that doing so will lead to an actual engagement, discussion, and exchange of ideas with the party I’m disagreeing with. I respond to shin and you and bert and pug because you guys will likely see my response. The Chinese commenters that were translated? Not so much. Even so, I still do occassionally criticize some of what they say, but it is impractical to yell at someone who can’t hear you because you’re yelling at them from a website they’re not on. Shin and you CAN hear me because you’re ON chinaSMACK like I am.

I understand you made this argument because you’re trying to show that I’m hypocritical in what I object to, but a simple consideration of the situational dynamics and the setting of discourse should’ve shown you how ill-conceived your argument was. Moreover, as I’ve stated before in response to other complaints, I fully acknowledge that I react more to foreigners here than Chinese, though I’ve blasted the random ignorant Chinese fenqing that have occassionally find their way here. Is it really difficult to understand why? It is because foreigners are naturally disproportionately represented here by virtue of the website being in English. Yes, I do take it upon myself to be part of the minority voice of dissent here against a majority voice that I feel sometimes gets to be too unfair. This isn’t narrow-minded liberalism, this is me appraising the situation I’m in and speaking my conscience. Given that you are not party to the conversations I engage in with Chinese people (in Chinese), you have absolutely NO idea if and how I’m equally (and often more so) critical of them for their own ignorance, arrogance, and mistakes of rhetoric.

I don’t have a “phobia” of people pointing out negatives things about China. You subjectively interpret and accuse my actions as such. This is the same as me subjectively interpreting and accusing shin’s statement of being “mind-boggling idiocy.” Your self-righteousness is in failing to see how your objection and criticisms of me are no different and, by themselves, no more objective than my objection and criticisms of others like shin. One difference between you and I that I think is prevalent, however, is my willingness to respond to others point by point, explain my disagreement, substantiate my argument, flesh out my points, and actually take the time to do all of the above. While I also own up to indulging in some name-calling and vemon while I do the above, my indulgences don’t invalidate my arguments (though I grant they might make them more difficult to stomach).

Fauna made a good point above. shin made a complaint about China. I felt the complaint was offensive enough to complain about it. When you complained about my complaint, I explained explicitly what I was objecting to and why. While you now finally come out explicitly saying you’re not defending shin’s comment and distance yourself by calling it “silly”, you initially saw fit to complain about me for complaining about a comment you now also acknowledge to be indefensible. Why?

Because of your mistaken preconceptions of me. Because you subjectively long ago concluded I have some phobia of people saying negative things about China (despite the many instances where it is clear I do not). Because you’re too eager to confuse my objections against foreign arrogance to be objections against any criticism of China. You’re too eager to make me out to be the streotypical Chinese hyper-nationalist fenqing, because it would be easier to dismiss my objections and criticisms of the offensive exaggerations SOME foreigners indulge in, and even feel entitled to indulge in. You’re too eager to make it “us vs. them” instead of acknowledging mistakes and missteps where they are made. Yes, even though in the end you must rationally admit shin’s comment to be indefensible, you still chose to attack me instead of just acknowledging my valid criticism of his indefensible comment. Why?

Because you identify with what he felt:

BUT, albeit crudely, Shin has a point. Chinese society, in general, lacks empathy for strangers. That’s not an emotively charged statement. That’s a well-known observation that many, yes MANY, have made about mainland Chinese society.

Despite my repeated bolding and explanations of precisely what I was objecting to, you continued on your attack against me. You see, as evident by many of my other comments here on chinaSMACK and elsewhere you see fit to ignore or dismisss, I fully understand and identify with what shin felt too. I even said so:

I fully understand (and EMPATHIZE) with the larger phenomenon you feel is more prevalent in China than elsewhere, but that larger issue was NOT what I was blasting shin for.

Also:

Both of you are broadening the issue and I’m not going to argue with you on that because that’s not what I objected to. What I was appalled by was what I bolded: “Empathy is simply non-existent in China.” If you agree with the (lack of) intelligence behind such a statement, fine. I feel sorry for you. If you don’t, shut the fuck up and learn to defend what deserves defending, especially you, Asis

I already SAW where you were going, Asis, and sure enough, you continued right down that path, feeling it was more important for you to spend your time and energy accusing me of criticizing what I don’t like (no shit!) to culminate in some half-baked, ill-conceived, grand conclusion that I have a phobia against any negative comments about China DESPITE the evidence to the contrary and despite the very fact that I MAKE, WELCOME, AND OFTEN AGREE with well-reasoned criticisms of China.

I did make a mistake though. I mistook your comments to be a defense of shin when in reality they were more of an attack against people who criticize foreigners for criticizing the Chinese. The fact that you persisted in broadening the issue instead of acknowledging my argument that shin’s comment was indefensible showed you to be reluctant to accept even valid criticisms. You just had to broaden the issue and find some kind of way to argue why I shouldn’t object to shin’s comment. I respect Fat American far more than you, because he has the humility to read my response, acknowledge exactly what I was objecting to, and clarify his position. When he did so, he communicated to me that he wasn’t trying to defend the indefensible, and he made a reasoned argument for his own feelings. What he said was still something negative about China, but why didn’t I jump on him for it? Why did I fully acknowledge and accept it? Because I don’t have the phobia you accuse me of.

And yes, I am wide open to your charges of lacking empirical evidence, but the point is, it doesn’t matter how many big words you use or how much you condescend to people making these observations, it doesn’t matter about the whys or the wherefores, the fact is, it’s there. It definitely exists and would take willful ignorance not to pick up on it.

Further evidence that you don’t bother to read, or if you do, you’re so blinded by the prejudice you have against me borne by your own subjective mistaken conceptions of my position, that you don’t even process what you’re reading. As I quoted myself above, I very early and repeatedly explained that I fully pick up on the widespread feeling that acts/getures/demonstrations of empathy are notable lacking to many observers (including the Chinese themselves) in China. Why you would ignore these and press on accusing me of something that is not true is because of your own dogmatic pursuit to pigeon-hole me into what you prefer to think: someone who has a phobia. You’re so insecure with admitting your own mistakes or the mistakes of those you share sentiments with that you PURSUE denouncing anyone who critciizes you or those you share sentiments with. Instead of addressing my points of objection to shin’s indefensible statement and subsequent poor decision to defend his indefensible statement, you instead fabricated a persona for me, built a straw man, then pointed at it and asked everyone to dismiss my objections as invalid and only raised because I’m someone who illegitimately reacts to any criticism of China.

I do not illegitimately react to any criticism of China, however much you insist that I do. I was not disagreeing with the very understandable and shared observation that gestures of empathy in China seem lacking compared to many foreign countries. I was disagreeing and condescending towards someone who defended the indefensible statement of “empathy is simply non-existent in China.”

I have repeatedly brought the conversation back to this point of contention, and each time you’ve avoided it because you know (and have now admitted) that you could not win it. You’re now trying to frame the original disagreement as being about something else in order to make a false argument against me.

For you to argue that there is no difference between China and other foreign societies, ‘it’s just arrogance’ is ludicrous.

I never argued this. In fact, I often argue that there ARE very real differences. What did you think the whole conversation I had with bert and pug was about? Again, you’re misrepresenting my position in order to attack me for something I am not.

I have stayed in other impoverished countries, Kai. I’m not walking around China in a top hat and white khakis. I have nothing invested in feeling superior to the Chinese, and certainly haven’t ever felt superior to the people in the other poor countries that I have stayed in.

I subjectively think otherwise. I point to your comments and especially your comment over on CNR as the reasons for why I think otherwise. Everyone has a vested interest in feeling superior to others, it reaffirms our own values and ideology. Some people just do a better job than others of keeping that in check, reminding themselves to be careful with this very human proclivity. I find your absolute denial that you ever feel superior to others to be inconsistent with your comments and basic human nature. Your self-righteousness also comes across in this self-portrayal. I at least fully acknowledge my contempt for those I argue to be worthy of that contempt.

China however, is strikingly different to ALL the other countries I have been to. For me, the lack of empathy for strangers is one thing that marks it out.

If you read what I wrote above and previous comments, you wouldn’t even feel the need to say this. You doing so however only evidences the straw man you’re still trying to build.

As I have argued with others, I fully acknowledge that gestures of empathy appear lacking in China compared to many other foreign countries, but I do NOT think this evidences a non-existence of empathy in the Chinese, or even a substantial lack of empathy in the Chinese. Empathy is an emotion I feel the vast majority of Chinese possess in quantities similar or equivalent to most other humans in this world. I believe a better explanation and reason for why GESTURES or manifestations of this emotion are due to unique circumstances and environment in China that is DIFFERENT from many other countries. These DIFFERENCES discourage or make acting on such human empathy to be riskier or less wise. Others have corroborated this.

With you having the disingeneuousness to lecture ME on China being “different” is ludicrous given everything I have said that is now obvious YOU saw fit to completely IGNORE!

Again, this is your mistake, this is your oversight, you are again misrepresentating.

What I am concerned with is your attempt to argue every negative comment about China like it doesn’t exist.

Untrue. See above.

And secondly, your language in doing so.

That’s fine. I fully acknowledge and accept people criticizing me for my language or tone. I just point out to them that it’s still better to challenge my points and arguments. At the same time, I clearly don’t like your language or tone of voice either. Are we even on this count? Sure.

You can’t call Shin a ‘mind boggling idiot’ for saying so.

I most certainly can and did, just as you CAN and DID accuse me of all manner of things. The difference is that I did a better job arguing for why I called shin what I did, whereas you’ve used a lot of imagination or selective reading building straw men to argue for why you call me what you do.

The fact that you do, is evidence of your trollish behaviour at times, which, it seems you have admitted to being guilty of (’fight fire with fire’).

I don’t think “trollish” is applicable to either of us, as I certainly thought of accusing you of it before but refrained from doing so because there is insufficient evidence to support such an accusation.

A troll exists to flame and annoy other people just for the sake of doing so. smickno was a troll, even by his own admission. Given that I make tons of comments on chinaSMACK, many of which discuss the subject matter of the post or constitute reasoned debate with other commenters, I do not think my overall behavior qualifies as “trollish”. In fact, between the two of us, and the proportion of the comments you contribute that are preoccupied with reacting to and attacking me instead of talking about some objective subject, I’d say your behavior is closer to “trollish.”

“Fighting fire with fire” is not trollish behavior. Go look up the urban dictionary or something. In fact, you persistently attacking me with clear misrepresentations is closer to being trollish behavior. Mind you, this isn’t just me saying “no, you!”, this is me pointing out your mistaken understanding of the word “troll” and how your behavior is more in line with the actual definition of “troll.”

If you’d just said;

“hang on Shin, that’s a bit unfair, it’s obvious that not ALL Chinese people lack empathy”

you wouldn’t have heard from me. Hell, I might have even given you a thumbs up.

Yeah, I know. I could have, but I chose not to because I don’t think he deserved me being so polite to him after he was so disrespectful and impolite to others.

I’m tickled silly that you’d even presume to lecture me on this after I responded to shin arrogantly defending his indefensible comment with:

A simple, “my bad, I was exaggerating” would’ve sufficed. Instead, you followed up with: “empathy may exist in 0.01% of the population (the educated portion…sorry)”. Again, all of this just one day after the 1-year anniversary of the Sichuan Earthquake.

I’m not shin’s fucking parent. I don’t owe it to him to coddle him and teach him how to not make patently stupid and indefensible comments. We can even say my willingness to call him out so directly implies my inherent belief that he’s a peer, not some fragile child I should handle with care. What’s wrong with me expecting and being disappointed with him not being intelligent enough to not make such an indefensible comment? What’s wrong with me expecting him to be humble enough to acknowledge the inherent idiocy of what I objected to? What’s wrong with me taking him or others further to task for actually have the gall and arrogance to defend his initial indefensible statement?

Yeah, I fought fire with fire. He was disrespectful and I opted to be disrespectful to him. If and when I make a patently idiotic and indefensible statement, I’m perfectly fine with people calling me out for it, just as I’m perfectly fine with you objecting to a tone of voice you find disagreeable. What I’m NOT perfectly fine with is you accusing me and attacking me hypocritically and without substantiation. I own up to what I cannot defend. I do NOT accept your misrepresentations and mischaracterizations of me so long as I can show them to be misrepresentations and mischaracterizations.

There’s plenty examples like this.

Like what?

Like when you deliberately insinuated that I want the CN review to be about ‘foreigner bashing’ just to get a rise out of me. Or like when you said that I ‘literally go around boasting about my own intellectualism’ when the source that you link to shows nothing of the sort, and certainly not “LITERALLY”.

When you retorted on CNReviews that its a “pointless blog” AFTER I replied to you that the post you were responding to was NOT about bashing foreigners (in fact, it was actually kinda defending them), what do you want me to think?

When your comment on CNR evidences you completely missing the point of the post and jumping to writing a defensive rant (”Well, excuse me if I don’t indulge in some orientalist fantasy”) explaining that the reason you aren’t interested in making local Chinese friends because you “don’t have anything in common with” them because “the fact” is that, “intellectualism is dead here” and “[m]ainland Chinese people don’t really do ‘deep’”. I know you excepted “some pockets in the big cities (and best universities)” but that certainly looks like you “literally boasting about your own intellectualism” relative to the Chinese. That you then juxtapose it with the “Taiwanese friends” you made certainly reinforces my interpretation of you boasting.

Now, certainly, people are free to go read what you wrote and judge for themselves. I’m fine with that. That’s why I provided the link.

I was even nice and didn’t even take you to task for doing what you all too often do in reaction to reading something I wrote that you don’t like: accuse me of knee-jerk reacting to any negative comment about China. You spent two paragraphs in your comment on CNR pre-emptively arguing for why I shouldn’t take offense to your comments before I even took offense. And when I was correct in pointing out that you missed the point of the post thus negating your whole rant and pre-emptive defense, you got all huffy and retorted:

Well if that’s true, your blog is even more pointless than I first thought.

So my blog is pointless because you missed the point, jumped to conclusions, and embarrassed yourself by acting on those conclusions. Good job.

Your trollisms make your triviliasations of problems in China seem even more visceral; ‘visceral’ because you appear to have an instinctive disliking of people criticising China, even it seems, when it is a reasonable observation. It’s this element that lies at the heart of your responses, and at the heart of why I take you up on what you say.

No, it is you prefering to think this of me that lies at the heart of why you take me up on what I say, not that you do a good job of it what with all the misrepresentations and failure to acknowledge what others say. I don’t trivialize the problems of China. If anything, I take them quite seriously as others have noted throughout this website and elsewhere. I don’t have an instinctive dislike of people criticizing China but I do have an instinctive (thank God) bullshit meter AND dislike of self-righteous racial/ethnic/cultural superiorty-complexes, whether it manifests itself in criticizing China or otherwise. You would do well to learn the difference between the two.