<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ May 25 2008, 08:25 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>haha my man you are alright in my book. What do you think of the (now old) Mark Jackson + Ian Eagle combo? That one was my favorite
<div><object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="
"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="
" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350" /></embed></object></div></div>
Haha I remember that game. I literally rolled in front of the screen.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ May 25 2008, 08:55 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If it's not xenophobia, it's about control over the people and it's completely wrong. Show support to the domestic industry... riiiiight. That's what they want you to think.</div>
Hmm I'll have to disagree there. The situation in our country is much more complicated than mind-control or absolutism.
Over the past thousands of years until recently the idea of "government" had been drastically different from that of modern Westerners' point of view. It was engrained in Chinese philosophy that an ideal administrator should "look after" his or her people and "take care of" their welfare not only as an officer but as their elders. Ancient Chinese people called their governors "parent officials" or sometimes even "parents" itself. Also as the proverb goes, "an official who can't decide for the good of his people had better pack up and plant sweet potatos in hometown."
I know this sounds crazy to you because it seems not "democratic" at all. But back then it was really expedient. The majority of people then were illiterate and our promotion system ensured the most learned got picked as officials (at least supposedly so, through imperial examinations). Therefore the administrator did have a bigger chance of choosing the right "right" from the right "wrong" for those they governed, simply because they had more knowledge and learned more lessons by reading archives and history books.
Now the thing is, although we know and those in power know that, administrators today are not necessarily better educated or trained any more, the ideology passed down generations after generations is very unlikely to change overnight. However hard those up there try to tone down and however many times this "parent official" thing is criticized as outdated, it still takes time to alter right?
Without a doubt, Chinese government often tends to over-manage and there is a long way to go. But contrary to the common Western belief that it results from an evil-minded, 1984-esque Core, we who have lived in this country long enough understand its attitude should be called "patronizing" instead of "manipulative".
Does that indicate the Chinese gonvernment wants to solidify their status? Sure but which government LOVEs to be overthrown? Do we complain about its patronizing manner? Hell we do a lot
Who'd like to be considered as immature adolescents in need of parental guidance all the time? But the point is, the government is making adjustment and we are helping it to do so, which is definitely better than throwing away our entire history and starting all over again.
Government wants people to believe this and that because they needs to have a standpoint and a direction of guiding, otherwise people will panic. Yet they can choose to believe it or not. I don't think it an easy job to brainwash anyone who has a sound reasoning, and average Chinese are far from pathetically dumb.
Now please let's talk about BBall, doubtful highlights from last year, draft and trade, anything but politics.
