I was reading this blog post this morning about Jackie Chan saying its better the Chinese don't have to much freedom like they have in Hong-Kong.

Jackie Chan speaks from the heart: meeeh (21 Apr, 2009)

Quote:
We’re sure you read or heard by now that Hollywood Walk of Fame star Jackie Chan thinks you’re a bunch of sheep that require herding: “I’m not sure if it is good to have freedom or not,” he said. “I’m really confused now. If you are too free, you are like the way Hong Kong is now. It’s very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic.” He added: “I’m gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we are not being controlled, we’ll just do what we want.”

I totally agree with this blog, how the hell can he say something like that?
How can a guy who makes his living off of the free turn on us so suddenly?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/21/2009 11:35PM by Olive.

Probably they have pictures of him in bed with different kinds of girls like Edison Chen. And then blackmailed him to be a puppet.

Beisdes Chinese in China have more freedom. There's no laws about spitting, littering taking a shit on the streets. In Hong Kong you can't have your baby running around in crotchless pants so your baby can conviniently take a leak or dump like a pet dog on the streets. In china you can freely sell things on the streets like fruits, DVDs, BBQs etc. and there's nore rent fees (maybe a little bribing fee with the cops) for doing that! So many things you cannot so in Hong Kong. And Hong Kong's laws and law enforcers can be effective at catching violators too!

Quote:
Moroes Wrote: Probably they have pictures of him in bed with different kinds of girls like Edison Chen. And then blackmailed him to be a puppet.

You are free to break the law in mainland China... not sure if that's a good thing haha!

As for Chan, he's a Hollywood star talking in mainland China, he doesn't want to get banned so I'm sure he's just saying what he knows the leaders want to hear. What do you expect him to say at a meeting like that? That China needs democracy? He'd never be allowed back in the country.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2009 04:32AM by Olive.

I was told that he didn't say anything about freedom. What he said was that the Chinese people shouldn't be handed over to democracy all at once and that it should be a gradual change unlike it was in Hong Kong.

But again Western media blew it out of proportion for some reason or another...but my source who told me this may have gotten some bad information as well, and he very well could have said it...but I don't believe he would say this as his career depends too much upon China and not the US and even he knows that.

My Country and my People（吾国与吾民） New York: Reynal & Hitchcock, Inc., (A John Day Book)
this is a very good book to know china better,very objective~~i am reading the chinese version~~~~~~~~

Sammo Hung commented on Jackie Chan for his recent remarks at the Bo'ao Forum: "What he said did not represent the Seven Little Fortunes, and the other things that he said does not represent the people of Hong Kong either."

Hhhmmm interesting, so he very well could have said this word for word lol. I think it's funny.

Let's not forget Jackie served as China's Olympic ambassador. He seemed uncomfortable then when he was asked touchy questions. Maybe he's got a tight leash on.

LOL it's possible. Well he made his money if he never does a movie again he won't be hurting too bad I bet lol.

Jackie Chan meant.. politically chaotic. Sure Hong Kongers don't let their babies run around naked on the streets, but it's a political democracy over there, which means you're bound to have some clashes of ideology and a few riots here and there during election time.

Mainland China has only one Communist Party, so political will is much more focused and undivided. And people don't really have a choice, so no clashes of ideology there.

Phoenixlament Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mainland China has only one Communist Party, so
> political will is much more focused and undivided.
> And people don't really have a choice, so no
> clashes of ideology there.

So what is with the bus bombings that happen every now and again? Or the Guys out west who drove a dump truck through a military parade and threw a bunch of grenades into the barracks? Or the massive riots in (I think it was) Hebei two years ago where they had to shut down all airports into the province because it was getting so bad?
There are TONS of clashes here, just no one hears about them. I'd say things like riots and protests that happen in democracies often actually help stop bigger clashes of ideologies. It gives the people the feeling they are doing something even when they aren't really. Protest, get your anger out, and go back to work.

It's idiotic, that's why actors shouldn't make big political statements. That is not their area of expertise. For China, democracy should be implemented as soon as possible. Not as gradually as possible, that's just another lame excuse to avoid change. The communist elites loathe the "c" word, think about it, if the whole country turn democratic, they will have to relinquish all of their power!! who in their right state of mind would do that! (George Washington doesn't count)

Even if China switched to democracy, the communist elites could easily become the democratic elites and cause the same amount of pain. Of course in the beginning it will seem better...but it will slowly get worse and worse as more people abuse the system...seriously...human beings can't help themselves from abusing the system....it's sad really...

Now, I'm not saying it's wrong for China to go 100% democratic. I think China should be allowed to evolve and change at whatever pace it goes. Which never ever stays at a constant pace. It can speed up, slow down, and speed up again.

Brumegepard,

I understand you wish to see democracy implemented in China, ASAP. However, what I do not understand is your criticism of Jackie Chan's statements.

You say his statements are idiotic and that actors should not make any sweeping political comments. However, I will only point out that he and any other actor have every right to say what is on their mind in a democracy.

Jackie Chan's statement is simply his exercising of democracy. The fact that his beliefs is in direct contradiction to your own should not be an issue. In fact, you should protect his right to say what he wants to say, if you truly are a champion and advocate of democracy.

Brumegepard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For China, democracy should be
> implemented as soon as possible. Not as gradually
> as possible, that's just another lame excuse to
> avoid change.

How exactly would you bring that about? You'd have mass chaos, Tibet and XinJiang would immediately be causing problems, Hong Kong and Taiwan as well. China could never exist as a Democractic Country sadly... I'm not saying the people shouldn't have freedom, just that democracy as we know it wouldn't work.

Actors and Actresses shouldn't talk about politics. They have too much sway over the sheep. Jackie Chan opening his big mouth could cause a lot of instability no matter if it is for good or bad.

My question is should Britney Spears be allowed to open her mouth and influence all these young girls who look up to her and aspire to be a retard just like her?? Seriously, I think celebs should be censored publicly but not privately. If they want to talk politics then they should become one like Arnold Schwarzenager or Jessie Ventura. Until then they need to keep their yaps shut.

Lordarithon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even if China switched to democracy, the communist
> elites could easily become the democratic elites
> and cause the same amount of pain. Of course in
> the beginning it will seem better...but it will
> slowly get worse and worse as more people abuse
> the system...seriously...human beings can't help
> themselves from abusing the system....it's sad
> really...

I think that's one of the possible scenarios. But, can Chinese civilization bear yet another bloody revolution? No one wants to see that.

> Now, I'm not saying it's wrong for China to go
> 100% democratic. I think China should be allowed
> to evolve and change at whatever pace it goes.
> Which never ever stays at a constant pace. It can
> speed up, slow down, and speed up again.

I think there needs to be more people working the system from within, and gradually destroying the current system.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2009 03:46PM by Brumegepard.

Overseas.Born.Chinese Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brumegepard,
>
>
> You say his statements are idiotic and that actors
> should not make any sweeping political comments.
> However, I will only point out that he and any
> other actor have every right to say what is on
> their mind in a democracy.

but, everything you say in public is also subjected to the scrutiny of the public. I am not saying that Jackie Chan should not be permitted to express his opinions in Public. I am saying that I disagree with him, and that's it.



> Jackie Chan's statement is simply his exercising
> of democracy. The fact that his beliefs is in
> direct contradiction to your own should not be an
> issue. In fact, you should protect his right to
> say what he wants to say, if you truly are a
> champion and advocate of democracy.

Of course he has the rights to say what he wants to say, i just disagree with his. It's not like I'm saying "we should pass a law to ban public speech made by actors".

Uberche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brumegepard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > For China, democracy should be
> > implemented as soon as possible. Not as
> gradually
> > as possible, that's just another lame excuse to
> > avoid change.
>
> How exactly would you bring that about? You'd have
> mass chaos, Tibet and XinJiang would immediately
> be causing problems, Hong Kong and Taiwan as well.
> China could never exist as a Democratic Country
> sadly... I'm not saying the people shouldn't have
> freedom, just that democracy as we know it
> wouldn't work.

why wouldn't it work? The key is to control the military, and as long as we can control the military. A relatively peaceful coup is possible. But, to do this, we need some extraordinary individuals to work the party from within. I know this sounds crazy, but this might be the only way.

Even if the change is sudden and chaotic, there still are chances to reclaim the lost territories. Like the communists did when they took power in 1949. hey, it's not like once China has become democratic, we are all of sudden weak and can't defend ourselves. How hard it is to invade Tibet and Xinjiang anyways? Not that hard, consider they have minimal local militia and no weapons.

Lordarithon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actors and Actresses shouldn't talk about
> politics. They have too much sway over the sheep.
> Jackie Chan opening his big mouth could cause a
> lot of instability no matter if it is for good or
> bad.
>
> My question is should Britney Spears be allowed to
> open her mouth and influence all these young girls
> who look up to her and aspire to be a retard just
> like her?? Seriously, I think celebs should be
> censored publicly but not privately. If they want
> to talk politics then they should become one like
> Arnold Schwarzenager or Jessie Ventura. Until
> then they need to keep their yaps shut.

In principle, everyone has the right to say what's one their mind. But, remember, what matters here is who is delivering this news. IT'S THE MEDIA! That's right! The news papers in China and TV stations are all state controlled and censored. I highly doubt that the CHinese government would release a story like this if Jackie Chan said something along the line of: "As June 4th is slowly approaching, I will personally make a trip to Beijing, and pay my respects to the fallen student leaders of the revolution!".

It's the MEDIA, I think as long as there are multiple independent sources reporting on the same issue, (like in the U.S), then it's fine. on the other hand, if you have children who are only willing to watch the E-channel or StarZ, then there is nothing you can do about it.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2009 03:49PM by Brumegepard.

maybe Jackie Chan is pissed that so many Chinese buy cheap pirated copies of his movies, maybe he meant that Chinese piracy needs to be controlled.

love the man though, thanks to him, all Asian kids in middle school can pretend that they can kick ass.

Brumegepard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even if the change is sudden and chaotic, there
> still are chances to reclaim the lost territories.
> Like the communists did when they took power in
> 1949. hey, it's not like once China has become
> democratic, we are all of sudden weak and can't
> defend ourselves. How hard it is to invade Tibet
> and Xinjiang anyways? Not that hard, consider they
> have minimal local militia and no weapons.

Oh right... you meant the sort of Democracy that invades and kills innocent people... that should work well! Enjoy!

never liked him much anyway...

Uberche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brumegepard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Even if the change is sudden and chaotic, there
> > still are chances to reclaim the lost
> territories.
> > Like the communists did when they took power in
> > 1949. hey, it's not like once China has become
> > democratic, we are all of sudden weak and can't
> > defend ourselves. How hard it is to invade
> Tibet
> > and Xinjiang anyways? Not that hard, consider
> they
> > have minimal local militia and no weapons.
>
> Oh right... you meant the sort of Democracy that
> invades and kills innocent people... that should
> work well! Enjoy!

don't be naive, it's not like U.S hasn't invaded and killed innocent people ever since its creation.

Native Americans, Hawaiians, Cuba, Philippines...

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2009 06:16PM by Brumegepard.

Brumegepard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> don't be naive, it's not like U.S hasn't invaded
> and killed innocent people ever since its
> creation.
>
> Native Americans, Hawaiians, Cuba, Philippines...

So you're goal is to make China into a country like the US? A war loving country that uses brute force and murder to get its way in the world? Ok... I always hoped China would try to set the bar a little higher, at least in the beginning anyway...

Uberche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brumegepard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > don't be naive, it's not like U.S hasn't
> invaded
> > and killed innocent people ever since its
> > creation.
> >
> > Native Americans, Hawaiians, Cuba,
> Philippines...
>
> So you're goal is to make China into a country
> like the US? A war loving country that uses brute
> force and murder to get its way in the world?
> Ok... I always hoped China would try to set the
> bar a little higher, at least in the beginning
> anyway...


my goal is not to make China like any other country, but to be a strong country that's table for years to come.

It is also important to note that both Xinjiang and Tibet have been part of China for some time (from Qing dynasty), so it's not like the Chinese all of sudden want a piece of Malaysia or something.

Uberche,

Did I hear you correctly?

Did you say the US is a war loving country in your last post to Brumegepard?

If you did, I find it hard to understand how a war loving country, who has military bases surrounding China do not think of China as an enemy?

If the US is a war loving country as you stated, does it not follow reason then to think that US looks as every other nation as its enemy?

Brumegepard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> my goal is not to make China like any other
> country, but to be a strong country that's table
> for years to come.
>
> It is also important to note that both Xinjiang
> and Tibet have been part of China for some time
> (from Qing dynasty), so it's not like the Chinese
> all of sudden want a piece of Malaysia or
> something.


A strong country that invades and kills people. Cool

Overseas.Born.Chinese Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Uberche,
>
> Did I hear you correctly?
>
> Did you say the US is a war loving country in your
> last post to Brumegepard?

Your comprehension skills are getting better! Good job.

> If you did, I find it hard to understand how a war
> loving country, who has military bases surrounding
> China do not think of China as an enemy?
>
> If the US is a war loving country as you stated,
> does it not follow reason then to think that US
> looks as every other nation as its enemy?

It only follows in your mind because you are just trying to find any excuse you can to justify your pre-existing anger towards the US. It uses war to get what it wants, With China war wouldn't get it what it wants, what it wants is cheaply made crap which China is happy to sell and the US is happy to buy.

Uberche,

You are right that people in the US want to buy cheap things from China and that it is not in their interest to go to war with China.

However, the Global Power Elite has direct World domination constantly on their mind. Hence, if going to war with China through their US proxy nation can achieve their goals, you bet they will make war a reality between both nations, regardless of what the common people of both countries want.

Furthermore, you keep mentioning my anger with the US as motivating my statements regarding war between both nations. I have no such power to influence that decision. I just simply remind people of what can possibly happen in the near future.