NON-FICTION: TAIWAN'S PATHETIC INDEPENDENCE

I had always heard about how China wanted to control Taiwan.

It's the kind of thing that we know dictatorships do. At least four generations of Americans have spent their lives knowing China to be a gigantic mob of evil bent on storming our shores and extinguishing our leading light of liberty.

The American media generally focuses on China's claims towards Taiwan. But they don't portray this policy as what it actually is, a continuation and imitation of Taiwan's policy toward the Mainland back when it was The China.

Before Nixon and Carter shifted recognition towards the Peoples of Republic of China, and the ruling Communist Party, most western countries regarded The Republic of China as the legitimate government of China. This map shows the territory that the ROC (Taiwan) claimed control over.

The one China Policy is consistent with the Chinese system as recognized by the US and other western countries, there were not two separate countries until the US was forced to recognize the PRC, which had been ruling China, except Macao, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

The idea now that Taiwan is not part of China is hypocritical and indicative of the sort of mystical thinking reserved for the nobility of Nationhood.

Taiwan's main Languages, both the national language, guoyu, or Mandarin, and Taiwanese, Minnanhua, which has close relatives across the way on the Mainland province Fujian, are undeniably Chinese languages, part of the system that includes all the varieties of Cantonese, the different types of Shanghainese, and the hundreds of other dialect groups.

The ruling class in Taiwan came from all over the Mainland, the food is Chinese, the culture is Chinese, and I can't think of many aspects of Taiwan that are not closely tied to the rest of China.

I know there are differences, linguistically and culturally, but they are not likely to be that much more than those between people from Shanghai and Beijing, from Shandong and Guangxi, from Emigre Chinese communities and the mainland.

The perspective that dominates the most prevalent discussion of China-Taiwan relations is that of possible victim with possible victimizer, the question to be argued for or against being: Is the US government not being hard enough on China for it's aggressive, domineering posture towards Taiwan?

This is not to say that the similarity between Taiwan's and China's rulers are denied or covered up, but the dominant perspective is generally aggressor versus aggressee.

The democratic perspective would see that both Countries, for that is what they have been from the time the Guomindang/KMT fled the mainland, are governed by authoritarian regimes, where Taiwan's One Party Rule has recently given way to a less autocratic state, and both Countries achieved rapid economic growth and industrial modernization under One Party, dictatorial governments.

But the democratic perspective in American popular discourse is used more for criticizing bad guys, usually those who we are supposed to be condemning, or whom our government supports, rather than seeking an accurate objective description of the political affairs of other nations.

The simple, stupid fact is that two places that have different ruling bodies, and correspondingly different legal and economic systems, are, in fact, different countries.

Spain and Portugal are different countries, but Catalan, though linguistically and culturally different from the rest of the country, is part of Spain. Portugal is closer linguistically and culturally than the Basque region, but Portugal is a separate country. Kurdish Iraq is separate linguistically and culturally, but still part of the Country Iraq. What kind of idiots would debate whether or not the Kurdish region 'belongs' to Iraq? What sort of magical possession exceeds both physicality, observability, and delineation?

The idiots who would even debate the question of whether or not Taiwan is a separate country are so incredibly stupid that they would neglect the very definition of 'country.'

Instead they throw around conflations of politics and culture, replacing description; i.e. is Taiwan in fact a separate political entity, with prescriptions, i.e. should Taiwan be independent, or should it 'return' to China, and evaluations of similarity, i.e. are Mainlanders and Taiwanese culturally the same, ethnically the same.

Again, if the ubiquitous outrage at antidemocratic regimes and practices were to actually correspond with actual analysis from a presumption of the validity of democratic government, than we would merely say that Taiwan is a separate country insofar as the people in Taiwan choose so, and then we would face the discomforting prospect of applying that same logic to Texas.

The idea that we can decide if it is part of China, and if China should have it, or, god forbid, whether either country is good or bad, is just another manifestation of the dominant trend in our intellectual realms to conflate description and prescription, our opinions with the will of some other country's citizens, and the context of history.

The pathetic thing about the current Taiwanese independence is that it coincides with the failure of the ROC. When the theologians of The State decided that China was not Taiwan, and the rest of the world forgot that it ever had been, the Taiwanese government set off on a hobble towards independence, with policies like the "Four Wants, One Without," "Special State to State Relation," "Taiwanization," and the "Four Stages of Taiwan" All of these are rationalizations of the failure of Taiwan as a political entity.

Set up by Japan and the US to counter the will of the Chinese people, who wanted a communist revolution, and in order to counter that revolution with militaristic Nationalism, Taiwan now clings to the opposite zeitgeist, the primacy of democratic ideals.

NON-FICTION: Higher Power Example 1: Foreign Language

Believing in a higher power to restore sanity involves admitting that you are not control, that you cannot do it on your own.

This can give us both relief and hope. Relief to find out there is someone or something out there that understands the problem that plagues us and/or has the answer.

It also gives us a feeling of empowerment that allows to be humble at the same time, since we are giving over power in our lives to something outside of ourselves, we are giving up power, and submitting to something else, foregoing safety and our need to maintain walls that we think keep our ego's safe.

As for learning another language, we must also give up control and the pretense of independence.

If our actions do not conform to the standard, we are wrong, we have failed, and we can only try harder to conform.

At the same time, we know that all we have to do is wipe away the reactions and reflexes of our native language, and allow our minds to receive the new sounds and patterns.


To learn the language of other people, we can do nothing but imitate them, and accept that they're sentences are right, if they make them, and ours are wrong, if we make them without first relying on imitation.

The sounds we make in a foreign language are dependent on imitation of others. If we insist against all the speakers of French, that our American pronunciation of their words is correct, than we only maintain error for the benefit of a false ego.

The more we hold onto to our native habits of grammar, pronunciation and connotation, the more we reveal the illusion of independence.

Learning a new language means giving yourself over to it, allowing your mind to edit out your own language, wipe away your linguistic reactions and classifications, and submit to a new system.

Each time we go through this denial of our established habits, and thoroughly submit to the new grammar, writing, sounds, and patterns, we then come out stronger, finding that our old habits, laid into our minds as children, are completely undamaged.


The unproven, unaccounted for neurological impediments to learning a new language are so annoying in that they never take into account the primacy of denial in learning a language, that is, the primacy of denying our linguistic reactions.

When we see a incomprehensible page of text, we must allow our mind to absorb and tune out the reaction that tells us: "This is foreign, this is not understandable."

That reaction, that anxious sense of alien-ness, is, in my experience, the greatest impediment to learning a new language.

So too with alcoholism is there a reliance on one's native habits, habits of coping through mood alteration, shutting people out to maintain your independence, your freedom from the control of others, your freedom to ruin your life.

To start dealing with alcoholism, you have to give it up. Give it up to Jesus if you want. Give up to the people who have been through this. Give up to your family, to the ghost of your dead relatives, to your children.

But you have to give up the pretense of control. As trivial as it may seem, the same goes for language.

In learning a new language, you are not in control, you are going to constantly make mistakes, feel helpless, stupid, and imagine or hear yourself laughed at.

But this is the way through to fluency. And giving up the illusion of control, of the ability to do it your own way all the time and still succeed, is also essential to finding the tools and means to replace alcohol with a healthy ego.

FICTION: Darrens Perilous Journey Part 5 (a choose my own adventure)

P.324. I lie and betray my god.

Well after all, according to Evolution, there's not even any god at all anyways to be seen at all! Plus, that dream boat that I was gonna be hooked up with after I did my thing on Hagriographing King Arthur totally the shizzles, unlike an antiquated system of rites and theological perspectives, which had long been outmoded by Science!


So, I'm all looking at these knights of the round table. And there just mad dogging me like theres no tomorrow. And I'm all, like, I'm thinking, dawg, if you don't back off right just bout now, I'm gonna start to bouwta bouwta, yeah!

But I just spit my meaning, like "Naw man, it's a'ight. I'meth a Christian, as be you'ens. It's just, like, some fool castething a spell all up on me!"

Then, the assembled Knights of the Table, laughed uproariously, since they had befuddled by so simple a mistake of understanding.

I was relieved, though on the inside, my thoughts were different. I couldn't help just feeling a slight twinge of guilt, and the more I tried to shake it off, the deeper it twinged, and it was still twinging away when I was interrupted out of my thoughts by Merlyns disruptive voice.

"My young sire, pleaseth thee to have a seat and enjoy of the Kings bounty, such as the beer and fresh Chicken."

I sat and down and dug in.

After the meal, the King and Merlyn spirited me away to the the lounge area where we actually did, lie, totally lounge, all casually an' shit. And the king began to tell me of where he had desired to be hagriographed.

The lounge area was circular, and one circular sofa adorned the wall, all the way round the room, in an 'o' formation that left occupants with sense of something like an oval.

As we reclined, and servants tossed peeled grapes into our mouths, the King finally got down to brass tags, and spilled the dirt. "I want thou to knowest most certainly as to the reason wherefore I beith askingeth you to set down my glorious record of feats. You see, a Sodomite beith I."

Whoa Whoa, and double schnap! I knew that word from the bible! This guy was gay, what a faggot!

But I sure as hell wasn't gonna spit that in front of him. But damn, dawg, how you gonna say something like, it's all, just like bam, just putting it out there. I mean, that's like, I guess, like keeping it real, but I'm all like, that;s just so, so gay!

I could barely even hear the King as he was continuing to say his words. "So, all the fables told that beith of mine life, haveth not the true spark, for they harbor a Eurocentric lust that forbiddeth my hidden desire."

But as I tried to focus on the King who was kinding mumbling and dribbling grape juice while he talked, Merlyn loudly interjectd with exclaim "They're here, by the gods, they areth here!"

Booms and noises loudly came to me, as I heard the sound of something exploding and people fighting.

Here we go again, I thought, and smiled at the concentrated echo of all my movie heroes.

Just then a squadron of estrange warriors burst into the lounge area, causing all three of us to sit, boltly upright.

The warriors were rippled with muscles, and of hard exteriors forms. They looked dangerous, and had on armor, with scary pictures of pure intimidation on it.

One of them popped a cap at Merlyn, before the revered old grand wizard did so much as shake a stick of his wand, and a bullet pierced his wise, bewrinkled forehead.

I could not even shed my tear before they grabbed King Arthur and teleported out of there, pronto style.

I quickly shot up to my feet, and shot out of the room as fast as I could muster.

In the hall where I had just grubbed on, the Knights of the round table lay dead, and murdered, killed, I surmised, by the rascallious bandits who had abducted the one man that stood between me, my hagriographies, and the boat of my dreams.

My face grimaced, hard-core style, and I wore a look of grim determination.

I would get the King back, and I would totally own those dastardly mercenaries who got in the way of my plans.

But how could I do it?

P.329, I try to revive Merlin.
P.98, I call up my posse.
P 43, I give up and blame America.

NON-FICTION:Isolated, Weak Conservatives

Obama's statement of American arrogance in foreign relations, and Bill Clinton's conciliatory statements regarding the journalists imprisoned by North Korea have inspired outrage and indignation among scared little conservatives.

When you know a person who consistently says: "I don't see why I have to apologize, I didn't even do anything!!!", you can then verify certain facts of their personality:

1. Low capacity for Objectivity:
Not knowing that your own certitude and emotionally intense internal experiences occur independently of the truth or falsity of any particular thoughts you have.

2. Low EQ:
Not understanding that these emotions are equivalent to other peoples' emotions, and they don't come from the truth or righteousness of any particular thought.

3. Low SQ:
Not understanding that everyone goes through this experience, this is why we have arguments and why techniques for resolving disputes are necessary, and that these techniques often require us to suspend our emotions, choosing the psychological and material benefits of interpersonal relationships over internal feelings.

As I noted in the post on Health Care, the dominant theme of conservatives now is fear of the Other.

This same fear is stimulated now by the idea that the top Democrats are weakening this country by apologizing. Pat Buchanan said, on MSNBC, that Clinton's conciliation with Kim Jong Il gave this dictator a lot of power in Asia.

If you the reader find that a credible statement, it might benefit you to get to know the rest of the world, if just a little bit.

The excitement of Buchanan and other conservatives about the grave weakening of America's image is contrasted nicely with the popular ideas about Clinton and Obama in China. Some of the reasons that these two appeasers are well liked in China is that they are considered very intelligent, reasonable, and friendly. Bush, on the other hand, was mostly regarded as dangerous and stupid.

In most countries, a country that believes in avoiding apologies and claiming to be the strongest, or most righteous nation in the world, is not fondly thought of, and may often be thought of as threatening.

North Korea is a nothing country, that everyone looks down on, pities, or regards as dangerous.

What do we think of dictators that constantly talk up the threat of everyone else? What do we think of people in our personal lives who regard apology as losing, giving someone power over them, or shaming themselves?

Conservatives have spent plenty of time talking up threats and freaking out over apologies, which may or may not have occurred.

On a Chinese news report I saw, it was reported that Kim Jong Il actually apologized to Clinton.

I know many times when I have lacked the strength to be humble, the strength to suspend my moral certitude, the strength to regard others as equals rather than hostile threats or fellow partisans in a struggle against the oppressive others.

But having the strength to apologize, to give in to another persons view of yourself, is part of growing, healing, and achieving and maintaining personal, romantic, professional and diplomatic relationships.

Conservatives like Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, and O'Reilly are afraid to give in to the perception that they are flawed, or that the country they love might not exist, but might only be a collection of semi-intelligent, mostly inherited, prejudices and simplifications of history.

Oberman and Maddow over at MSNBC might not be that different in respect to their commitment to their ideology. However, right now I am much more sympathetic with their side, than with the opponents of universal health care, or whatever malnourished version of that which congress finally manages to pass.

A sad mockery of universal healthcare is, at least, a start.

While the scared little conservatives go through the other-hate, labeling Obama as a non-Christian, non-American, hater of White Culture, etc., I hope the Democrats finally have the balls to make some real change.

In the long run, Americans will support them. FDR and Truman were widely condemned as Communists, sliding us down a slippery slope to Moscow, for advocating services such as Medicare, Disability, Unemployment, and Social Security.

Now, no one really opposes this. (of course, I know the pseudo free market types and Libertarian-Austri-Objectivists do) And no one really will oppose government provided Health Insurance for people who can't get it themselves once its been in place for a decade or two.

The conservatives, now conserving nothing more than the empty rhetoric of fifties and sixties era libertarians and red-crazy patriots, will try as much as they can to scare everyone, just as Regan did at the prospect of Socialized Medicine back during that same time period.

I can only hope they will lose. But hope often has little direct efficacy.

FICTION:宴子新版

宴子要到上海代表广西省商会。 准备跟上海市长约会， 但是到了市长办公室，保安不让他进去，说宴子可以发个信息给市长。 宴子也听保安讲：山下人。 宴子说，那你们狗屁小人可以发个信息！别瞧不起外地人， 他妈的！ 这里人都是崇洋媚外。

突然，市长出门了看到三个人吵架。 市长问了保安怎么回事，保安说：没事，没事。伊捣浆糊。 宴子打断了：市长， 我叫宴子， 我的秘书已经跟你的秘书约好时间。

市长明白了：对勿起, 对勿起。就请宴子进来会议厅。 两人做好，工作人员上了咖啡茶。 市长问宴子：搿么，广西不是很穷吗

宴子回答：咋说穷呀？ 我省将要变成大海港唯一！ 什么穷啊？ 今天在广西刚开了一百家沃尔玛特。 我们老百姓早上都开着奔驰去吃早饭， 周末休息就开着f-1法拉利车去玩儿。

市长笑了笑，讲：侬真是捣浆糊。

下次，宴子要来拜访市长，市长问了他的住手：怎么对付宴子，我要侮辱他， 他一直要说他省这么好！

助手讲：那这样吧。 他来了就让保安抓过来一个外地人， 在宴子跟前，保安要说抓的人是贼，让后你问他，做啥?, 保安就说， 这个来自广西的坏人刚刚在外面福州路陪着一帮新疆人偷钱包。

到时候，市长请宴子和几杯屋里厢。 保安来了，带了一个人，根据计划就讲了。 讲完后，市长问：广西那么好怎么有这么多小偷！

宴子说：烧饼往北方就变成馍馍，河粉到别的城市就变成米线， 蛋糕会变成洋饼。 我的老乡来到你这个城市，就变成贼，那是什么引起的。

市长笑了大笑说：侬老会讲！