This
is the sixth part of the memoir of my four-year tour of duty as a radio talk
show host for AM1300 (KAZN).
From
the time of Mao Zedong’s death, China
went through a period of liberalization under Mao’s appointed successor Hua
Guofeng, who loosened the speech control somewhat. There was, at that time, a
public outcry, permitted by Hua, to get Deng, who was purged by Mao, to work
again. The movement was led by the young people, Wei Jingsheng, who would soon
be arrested by Deng.
The
Hua-Deng liberalization, which is known in China
as “reform and open,” was largely releasing the power to the provinces, by
allowing the provinces to collect the taxes and spend much of it. The reform lasted
till 1989, when Deng called in tanks and troops to suppress the student
movement in Tiananmen Square and Zhao Ziyang, his
hand-picked manager. From that time on, the security of the Communist rule,
rather than the economic liberalization, becomes Deng’s number one issue.
In
1993, Zhu Rongji, then the Premier, worked to take back the power of taxation
to the central government. The new tax law was implemented in 1994, when the
power moved from the provinces to Beijing .
Since that point on, the so-called state-owned enterprises (SOEs) begin to
dominate the Chinese economy because it has the government power at its
disposal.
At
one point, the state run oil companies were not interested in gas stations.
However, when they changed their mind later on, they simply have the government
issue an order to ask all private gas stations in profitable locations to close
their doors.
In a
short period, with the government power, in the supply chains of almost all
products in China ,
there would be SOEs that use their monopoly power to set the prices. Therefore,
these SOEs are highly profitable. With the SOEs, a stratum of the population
becomes rich.
With
the 1989 massacre of students by Deng and the subsequent re-centralization by
Zhu, the liberalization of the early period of the reform disappeared. Most
significantly, the free speech in colleges was no longer allowed.
As
children were forced to recite Party nonsense from kindergarten, they developed
an underground language, which was represented in Guo Jingming’s novels, and
mainly consist a lifestyle full of foreign luxury brand with vain talking,
known by the title of one of Guo’s novel Small Epoch (translated in China
as Tiny Times). Therefore, for today Chinese youth, who grow up since 1989,
their minds are full of the Party doctrines and the vain Small Epoch thinking.
The
damage to the children by forcing them into this double thinking is tremendous.
One has to have personal relation with some of the Chinese youth to truly feel
the impact. Although it is quite possible to see this in those who came to the U.S. ,
the true impact could only be felt inside China .
As
monopoly goes, this type of mind-control only steps up, with each generation of
the Beijing regime. As the
brainwashing was strengthened since 2012 by the present ruler, so have self-contradictions.
To prop up the Party’s image, the Chinese newspapers reach out to report
stories such as married couples spend their wedding night coping the
Constitution of the Chinese Communist Party, absolutely ridiculous things are
reported in China
with a straight face. Any publications that are not tightly under the control
of the Party’s apparatus, such as 炎黄春秋,
or Sprint and Falls of China, which is a magazine run by retired Party
officials to record the past, was forced to close by the present regime. As
monopolies go, the situation is quick worsening. When asked whether there is a
way out, Zhu Rongji simply said: No.
A
recent story probably shows the degree of the problem. In a joint news
conference with the Chinese foreign minister on June 2, 2016, in Ottawa, the
Canadian reporter asked Stéphane Dion, the Canadian foreign minister, a
question: “There are no shortage of concerns
about China's treatment of human rights advocates, such as the Hong Kong
booksellers and its detention of the Garratts, not to mention the destabilizing
effects of its territorial ambitions in the South China Sea. Given these concerns,
why is Canada
pursuing closer ties with China ,
how do you plan to use that relationship to improve human rights and security
in the region, and did you specifically raise the case of the Garratts during
your discussions with the foreign minister today?”
The
mentioned “Hong Kong booksellers” were kidnapped by the Chinese authority from Hong
Kong to the mainland China .
The “detention of the Garratts” is about a Canadian couple, Kevin and Julia Dawn Garratt, who
were detained in China
in 2014 on espionage Charges of stealing state secrets while they lived near
the China ’s border
with North Korea .
Hearing
the question, Wang Yi jumped in, uninvited. Here is his comment: “I
want to make a response to the questions that the journalist has just raised
concerning China .
Your question was full of prejudice against China
and an arrogance that comes from I don't know where. This is totally
unacceptable to me. Do you understand China ?
Have you been to China ?
Do you know that China
has come from a poor and backward state and lifted more than 600 million people
from poverty? Do you know that China
is now the world's second biggest economy with $8,000 per capita? If we weren't
able to properly protect human rights, would China
have achieved such great development? Do you know that China
has incorporated protecting human rights into its Constitution? I want to tell
you that it's the Chinese people who most understand China 's
human rights record — not you, but the
Chinese people themselves. You have no right to speak on this. The Chinese
people have the right to speak. So please don't raise such irresponsible
questions again. China
welcomes all well-meaning suggestions, but we reject all groundless
accusations.”
That
exchange was widely reported in China .
As soon as the exchange was published, a parody appeared in the Chinese social
media:
Neighbor:
I heard that you beat up your wife and kids at home.
Mr.
Wang: In the past, the don't even have enough food to eat.
Neighbor:
I asked you whether you beat up your wife and kids.
Mr.
Wang: Our family is the second richest family in the village.
Neighbor:
I did not ask you that. I just asked you whether you beat up your wife and
kids.
Mr.
Wang: You other neighbor Mr. Liu beat up his wife and kids. Why did you do
nothing about that?
Neighbor:
I asked you whether you beat up your wife and kids.
Mr.
Wang: In your history, have you never beat up your wife and kids?
Neighbor:
I asked you whether you beat up your wife and kids.
Mr.
Wang: We have included anti-violence clauses in our family rule book.
Neighbor:
I only asked you whether you beat up your wife and kids.
Mr.
Wang: Your question was full of prejudice against my family and an arrogance
that comes from I don't know where.
Neighbor:
I only asked you whether you beat up your wife and kids.
Mr.
Wang: Please don't raise such irresponsible questions again. We welcome all
well-meaning suggestions, but we reject all malicious questions.
Neighbor:
I only asked you whether you beat up your wife and kids.
Mr.
Wang: I want to tell you that it's my wife and kids who most understand my
family — not you. You have no right to speak on
this. Only my family members have the right to speak. My wife and kids love me
to do what I do. You get out.
Today's
Chinese social media are full of jokes such as this one. It has become a part
of the Chinese social media culture. The Communist Party regularly delete, from
its Internet control center, any and all comments that it feels offensive. For
instance, if you negatively comment on a speech given by Xi Jinping, the
Communist Party General Secretary, the comment will be immediately deleted and
you visited by the police. However, jokes, including parodies, are still an
exception, at least when it is not aimed at the top leader.
Needless
to say, China
today is a frustrated mess. On one side, it is the indoctrination (patriotism).
On the other side, it is the foreign brand and jokes. So, the college students
would go the streets protesting the U.S.
imperialism in the day time, and prepare TOEFL (the language examination as a
part of the requirement of American universities).
The
split mentality is everywhere. So much so that the people do not think about it
any more. Contradictions are simply their every day life.
Then,
there is the Stockholm syndrome, which is a psychological phenomenon that when
the person is in the captured situation, they would side with their capture’s
interests, not their own interests. As the Chinese people live in a captured
state (brainwashing, speech control, etc.), many of them have the Stockholm
syndrome. Even when their rights were infringed, they come out to demonstrate,
first by stating that they support the Communist Party, then they want to help
the Party to become a better Party. In the meantime, the Party hires more and
more police, from the Internet Police to SWAT teams, with the world’s latest
weapons to put more pressure on the people, so they would be clear of their
captured status.
Those
mental problems could be felt by anyone who have been to tourist spots lately
and stayed close to the Chinese tourists. One has to understand that reason is
something that they have been trying to avoid for all their lives.
When
the Chinese people move to the U.S. ,
they certainly bring to the U.S.
all their problems. Interestingly, much of the problem is not particular to the
Chinese here. Those from Taiwan
has the very similar problems. They, just like those from China ,
take the abuse in stride, by convincing themselves that they have to take the
unreasonable treatment of the management.
From
a pure labor perspective, being a radio talk show host should require many more
years of education than, say, working for fast food chains, so they should not
be paid less than those working in fast food chains. (The radio talk show hosts
are paid the rock bottom rate, i.e., the minimum salary for the hours that the
spend before the microphones, but, unlike those working in fast food chains,
they need to prepare for they are going to say. In addition, if you work at the
fast food restaurants, you might even get a few cents or even a dollar or two
above the rock bottom minimum wage, due to competition.)
The
interesting fact is that the fast food employees demonstrate for higher wages,
forcing the fast food restaurants to adopt more and more technologies to reduce
the number of employees needed to run the operation. If the radio talk show
hosts get together and demand higher salaries, say equal income treatment from
the fast food chains, the station could not adopt technologies to replace them.
It is
their collected belief (that they convinced themselves that they only worth de
facto less than minimum wage treatments) that did them in. Of course, this
collected belief is partially responsible for the cheap products in Chinese
stores.
But,
although the employees, collectively and individually, do not want do anything,
they want their government to come in to help them out. In the meantime, they
are trained in China
not to think about the consequence of an all powerful government. For those who
come from China
(voting for Obama’s second term 80% to 20%), they certainly don’t want to think
why they come to the U.S.
in the first place.
On
one hand, there are many capable people working in the Chinese community,
because much money could be made. (Certainly, I am not saying that all Chinese
employers use the KAZN’s business model, as I know many employers treating
their employees fairly, but KAZN is certainly not the only one using that
model, as I have heard lawyers in the Chinese community hiring law school
graduates to work for them for free in exchange of being able to put the
experience on the resume and get favorable references, among other stories. One
story might be worth mentioning here is that the Chinese people, with all the
abovementioned problems, lack trust. So many lawyers offer outcome guarantees.
Their way to carry out the money-return guarantee, which, in fact, is entirely
different from guaranteeing the outcome, is to hire cheap assistants, so they
can afford to return some of the fees paid to them.)
On
the other hand, those who do not want to mess with the Chinese employers would
find jobs in the “main stream” companies.
Then,
those who could not manage a job offer in the “main stream” companies are
forced to stay and take whatever that is handed to them. These are the people
who lack abilities, partially due to their inability to exit the Chinese
mentality after moving to the U.S.
The Stockholm
syndrome is extremely acute in the radio station as the employees call the
station manager who fired me “sister,” who signs her name “Mom” when leaving
messages to the employees.
Also,
there is a saying in the station that, despite its low pay, etc., the station
does not fire anyone. At the same time, many in the station told me that, for
some reason, capable people could not stay in the station for long.
In
any case, when I was fired, for whatever it is worth, I forwarded the email
(originated from the manager to the program director) to everyone. I thought
that I should put that nonsense to rest. So, they may think about all those
people in the past. Did they leave, or were they fired?
Stockholm
syndrome
In
other words, there is a concentration of Chinese-minded people.
AM
1300 radio station is an example of this phenomenon.
(...
to be continued)
First
published on July 27, 2016
Contact
information:
Facebook：http://www.facebook.com/pujie.zheng
Blog:
http://pujielaw.blogspot.com/
Past
AM1300 (KAZN) programs in Chinese: http://www.youtube.com/user/pujiezheng
For
law firm business (business, patent, trademark, and business-based
immigration), please write to info@pujielaw.com or call 626-279-7200.
No comments:
Post a Comment