ProfileSun Bin (a mirror for su...BlogLists Tools Help
December 02

Maps of the 9 "Great Nations"

The "Great Nations" series chose 9 nations. Only nations in the modern world were selected (i.e. after 1500s). This is significant, because, as the narrative said, the year 1500 defines the first time that different disparate parts of the world finally met and compete (and conflict) with each other.

Before that, China was the center of its part of the world, so the Chinese empire (and the Roman, Persia, Alexander, Mongolia, Ottoman Empires) did not count. The subtle message is also that, in this new order China should not be thinking about restoring its old hegemony, because that hegemony only extended to a small part of the world, i.e. NE Asia; as a result, the future objective for China is not to dominate the world, but become a major player like (the average of) what (the "three really qualified great nations") Britain, Holland and USA is playing today.
  • Some Chinese commentator complained why the Qing empire was not included in the "Great Nations". After all, Qing still had over 1/4 of the world's GDP until mid-1800s. Qing was also a very effectively managed empire in terms of direct control. I think the key word is the the term "modern". The series was very adamant in stating that Britain was the FIRST modern nations in the world after Glorious Revolution, and Qing was definitely not a "modern" nation in this sense. The 3 nations preceded Britains all made contact with the whole earth (including Asia and the New World), while Qing was a local empire not different than Han or Persia of 2000 years ago.

Here are the extent of these empires at their apogee.

A few point worth noting
  1. According to the series, cultural influence is important, so these colonial empires, even though largely disintegrated by now, still maintain cultural influences to the areas they once occupied
  2. The influence (and contribution) to the world is one of the most important measure for a Great Nation given by the series, many of them (e.g. USA) influenced the world much more that what the map below paints
  3. France was hailed as a nation that influenced the war much more than the hard power it projected (i.e. despite its total failure in all the major wars it participated, including the Napolean wars. However, the program acknowledged Napolean for spreading the spirits of French revolution across the European continent, and in its emphasis on rule of law, the Napolean Code)
1) Portuguese Empire (Brazil became much larger later)


2) Spanish Empire (only the red areas)


3) Dutch Empire (Dutch was hailed for its business achievement, i.e. expanded basically without the use of force (it was noted that Dutch ships did not have guns and were therefore much lighter and cost effective than the Spanish or British ships). The subtext is that Dutch basically was competing under the modern rule of globalization competition .)


4) British Empire


5) French Empire


6) German Empire (Colonial empire shown, short term occupation in WWI and WWII not counted)


7) Japanese Empire (areas outside red/pink are short-lived occupation in WWII and should not be counted)


8) Soviet Empire (Only red areas, includes satellite states)


9) American Empire (This is post Spanish-American war map, does not include NATO sphere of influence or Okinawa after WWII, or occupied Afghanistan and Iraq)


10) Other colonial empires in wiki.
November 29

"The Great Nations" and "What does China want?"

The question "What does China want" has been asked by western observers repeatedly, especially back in the times when "China threat" rhetoric still received some attention (i.e. before Zoellick said "China is not USSR"). In an early posting of this blog I have argued that it does not matter what China's intention is, because in the medium term (i.e. 20-50 years) it will focus on economic development (and maintaining the hope of re-uniting with Taiwan some day in future), beyond that China's leadership would have changed a few times and it won't matter what it wants now, the optimistic case is that it will probably become a democracy joining the West (or be like Singapore, if not Japan). Therefore, the major concern for the West is not what China intends to do today, but to prevent major disaster in China's path of reform and development, because that may derail the risk-averse do-nothing path it is taking currently.

Apparently the CCP leadership did form some ideas on what they want for China in the longer term (on top of the near term goal of feeding its people and playing "economic catch up"), i.e., not surprisingly, China still aspires to restore the glory it enjoyed centuries ago, and want to become a "Great Nation".

The hint comes from a recent TV documentary series of 12 episodes, "The Rise of the Great Nations"(大 国崛起), which I recommend highly to those who are interested in the future of China, and in particular Chinese politics and international relations.

In terms of materials and production, the TV program is probably no different from the Discovery or BBC documentary in world history. One does not expect revolutionary academic insights from them, especially because CCTV is not yet in the same tier of BBC in general. In fact, it continues to use the notion of "combined power" along with RFGP by Paul Kennedy. Then why is this program important? and as a result believed to be a hint to China's next wave of reform by many observers? Because, if you believe it is part of the state propaganda then it would be an interesting exercise to deconstruct the messages it tries to convey, and there are many hints pointing to the allegation that the program is produced under an instruction from the Politburo
  • Explicit acknowledgement from the producer: The director (who is also the head of CCTV), Zhao Huayong, wrote in the preface (there is an accompanying book, in case the audience missed the messages) that, "The CCP Politburo attended a seminar in Nov 2003, the topic was the lessons of the development of the 9 major world powers from 1500 to today......These power has all hurted other nations, including China, in sometime on their path to great become great power, what kind of attitude and embracement should we adopt toward them? What experiences and learning should we find from their paths?" -- so even if this is not an instruction from the Politburo, the fact that CCTV dares to use the Politburo seminar in its promotion of the program tells us something. (Other interviews with the production crew here)
  • "2003 年11月24日,中共中央政治局组织了一次集体学习,内容是“15世纪以来世界主要国家发展历史”。这次学习在社会上引起了广泛关注,人们在想,斯时斯 地,打开尘封已久的历史,所为何来?...新中国的几代领导人反复强调:我们的发展,要吸收和借鉴全人类的文明成果。这些曾经在近现代历史上引导世界潮流 的大国,在历史上或多或少都对其他国家和民族造成过伤害,包括中国。今天,在中华民族重新崛起的进程中,我们应该以什么样的胸怀和态度看待它们?中国的和 平发展可以从中借鉴什么样的经验和教训?
  • Coincidence in timing: The documentary took 3 full years to produce. So it started in 2003, roughly right after the Politburo meeting. Either the CCTV director overheard the Politburo discussion and charged ahead or he received some instruction from the Politburo, as it is an unlikely coincidence in time. Since even the head of CCTV is probably not a very powerful figure compared with the Politburo, it is more likely the latter
  • Careful choice of word: The fact that the title was called "Rising", instead of "Development" explains that this documentary is for domestic consumptions. Because many Chinese citizen view the choice of the word "development" to be too weak and they still would like to see China "rising"; that it chose to use the word "great" instead of the more often used word "strong" in Chinese history is also important -- see below on definition of "Great Nation"
  • Pragmatic purpose: Regardless of the intent, the result of airing this documentary is that the Chinese citizens will get the messages conveyed in this series, and such message must not contradict the party line as otherwise it would have been banned. Therefore, for all practical purposes it is in line with the view of the Politburo (including the decision to skip the old teaching that colonialism pillaging crucially contributed to the initial stage of capitalism)
  • Heavyweight advisor team: this particular program from CCTV was able to enlist the best of the Chinese scholars, including internationally renowned scholar Wang Jisi (who was instrumental in the Hu-Zoellick meeting last year), in its advisor team. More likely, if one believes the theory that the Politburo ordered the production, Wang himself is the brain behind this series, and he probably carefully selected the messages to be conveyed in this series. In addition, Wang Jisi, together with historian Qian Shengdan who both were interviewed in the program and led discussion in the Politburo seminar, are said to be the mastermind behind this program (source).
During the production of the program a lot of interviews with prominent international scholars were conducted. The director then used these interview clips (by professors at top universities of the world, such as Paul Kennedy of Yale, and ex-politician Berezensky) to tell what it wants to tell its audience. This is a credible and low political-risk way of getting the message through. On the other hand, since it is an impossible mission to condense the lesson of a great nation into a 40 minute (in the case of Britain, Russia and USA, 80 minutes) episode of the documentary, the content has to be highly selective, so much that perhaps less than 1% fo the interviewed quotes (source) made through the final editing. Therefore, I have strong reason to believe the selection is thus highly deliberate.

Such selective highlighting of the lessons tells us what the Chinese leadership (or the director of the documentary) wants to tell its people/audience, because it wants the support of the people on what where it is going to lead them to. The central question is the million dollar question for China observers and internationl relations pundits: what does China want? The message the program wants to convey is that China aspires to be a great nation, and more than that, a SUSTAINABLE great nation. If we believe in the theory that this program is part of the state propaganda, then it tried to redefine what it means by the concept of "great nation" (and what it means by "Rise") for Chinese leadership as well. The definition is that a great nation is one that brings well-being and properity to its people, and contributes to the progress of the world. This definition of "Rise" or "Greatness" is not exactly the same as what the Chinese people (and other people in the world) used to associate with "Great", which is almost synonymous with "strong" and to a lesser extent, "Rich" (as known in Shang Yang's 商鞅 "Strengthen the military by enriching the nation" 富国强兵). Therefore, the leadership feels the need to educate the people about this definition so that the people will not mis-interpret the policy (e.g. of playing the stakeholder role as advocated by Zoellick) as being "weak". The program tried to define "Great Nation" by identifying a few key properties, which are re-emphasized in its concluding episode (the Finale) "Thinking through our actions based on broad and rightful principles" (大道思行), as follows:
  1. Great Nation = Innovation and contribution to its own people and the world: innovation of Thomas Edison, Dutch shipbuilders, Japanese businesses were discussed throughout the program. In the Finale the head of Chinese Diplomatic Institute Wu jianmin was quoted as saying something like this, "Great nation contributes to the world development, innovation is essential for making such contribution, and innovation is not possible if free thinking is constrained" (一个国家要崛起,它思想得创新吧,对吧。如果全是老思想,国家能崛起吗?崛起不了。思想如果都束缚住了,能创新吗?创新不了。所以文化的作用在这里出现了。)
  2. Aggression through force is to be avoided at all costs, as demonstrated by the example of Germany and Japan:
    • It showed the picture (below) of Warsaw Kneeling along with the comment "The moment Brandt kneels down was the moment Germany stood up in the world", sending the strongest message on its view that aggression is the wrong path to building a Great Nation;
    • in addition, it carefully defined the Meiji Restoration as a 100 year process (instead of 20-40 years, ending in the wars in 1895 and 1905), ending in 1968 when Japan finanlly rose with respect from the world through its economic success, and discounting the Japan's military success as short term aberration (in the Japan episode, the conclusion for Japan's lesson is that a Great Nation should (a) Bring prosperity and happiness to its own people (b) Bring peace and security to the world
    • The Japan lesson is further reinforce when it looks back to the lessons of the Iberian powers, conluding that without building one's own ability to generate wealth the rise is short-lived, and wealth through expansion and aggression are not to be depended upon
    • thirdly, the program made it clear that the modern world order is one in which competition is by business and innovation, and contribution to humanity and scientific knowledges, not by military success.
  3. Rule of law and building of a system: in almost all episodes, especially that of UK and US, the rule of law were emphasized. It was repeated again when it discussed the rise of Germany, and a long section on Thomas Edison and that US made the protection of intellectual property into its constitution, then again on how innovation in information technology helped US to lead the world again economically
  4. Focus on internal development and building sustainable capabilities: the Iberian powers were quoted as short-lived because they did not build the system and sustainable capability with all the wealth they accumulated from the New World. furthermore, this quote from Professor Zheng Yongnian of Nottingham University is note-worthy, "一个国家外部的崛起,实际上是它内部力量的一个外延。国家内部的制度还没有健全的情况下,很难成为一个大国,即使成为一个大国,也不是可持续的。"
  5. A lot of attention is given to building a system and ensuring the fundamentals, both economically and politically: an example is that of the Dutch bank which lent to the enemy Spain during war, maintaining its independence, the other are that of the Dutch government in 1600s which were formed by capitalist merchants, the narration talks about the Dutch paintings which portray the citizen (vs nobles and religious figures in other countries) with admiration
  6. For catching up 'great nations' (e.g Germany, Japan, Russia), the government must play the leading role: This is perhaps the most controversal point in this program, IMHO, as it not only emphasized the role of government "planning", praising its contribution to the Russian industrialization in the 1920s-1930s, it also praises the Keysian economics which influenced the role fo the governement in Rosevelt administration -- my concern is that it is difficult and tempting to forget the fact that government role is needed only when the problem is so serious that the invisible hand is unable to cope with it, and Chinese bureacracts, like bureacrats elsewhere will soon forget the principle that government intervention is needed only as a last resort)
  7. Together with the government role above, the views on USSR's "worthy experiment" on socialism and planned economy is positively ambiguous. My speculation is that the Politburo could not agree on these issues and decided they will keep the conclusion open (again, this is assuming that the program is part of the state propaganda). Same can be said about when globalization will truly make aggressive war obsolete, as in the Finale it stated such time will come even though if not in the medium term.
The messages couldn't be clearer. The question is how committed and how capable the Politburo is to push them through.

---
p.s.

1) The next wave of reform and policy making?
If we believe the theory that this program tries to pave the way for the next wave of reform, this is what it tells us
2) The Taiwan problem
  • The program stated that economist Friedrich List was instrumental in the unification of Germany in 19th century, in that he advocated unification by peace, not by force, and specifically through economic integration. Prussia created a common market without tariff before it could formally unify Germany. This was cleverly done through the mouth of a Ruetlingen University Professor (where List resided). Such strategy is already in place when China deals with the Taiwan problem
---

Links:
1) Videos websites (1-7, 8, 9, 10, 11-12) or bittorrent. (Server hjosted in the US, run by an exile pro-democracy activist Hu Ping), alternative host at Chinesenewsnet's Wan Runnan blog.
2) script is available in Wan Runnan' blog.
3) Discussions and comments by others (the most comprehensive collection so far), Selected translation by ESWN (ESWN seems to have only translated the first 2 pages, which are mostly negative comments, while the positive comments are on the next 2 pages of the webpage he translated)
4) My post yesterday
5) HK blog "MO's notebook"
6) Sina interview with Wang Jisi and Zhou Yan (executive editor, script writer)
7) people.com interview with Ren Xue-an, Editor of the series, Tang Zhongnan (President of Japan Study), Wang yiming(Deputy Director, Macro-economic Institute, DRC).
8) Mai Tianxu (one of the producers) interview on "compromise"
---
The quote of Wang Jisi and Qian Chengdan in the Finale

中国北京大学历史学系 教授 钱乘旦:

英国最早地确立了现代的国家制度。比如说我们现在熟悉的内阁制、君主立宪制、两党制、政府对议会负责等等这样的一套政治制度,在英国都是最早地确立。这样的政治制度能够使得这个国家长治久安,长久地保持一种稳定的状态,所以对经济发展是有利的。

Qian (Professor, Beijing University; speaker in the Politburo seminar)

Britain was the very first nation to establish the modern nation system. Take for example, political systems such as the now familiar cabinet system, monarch constitution system, 2 party system, parliament system, etc., were first established in Britain. Such kind of political system ensure the long term stability and security of this nation, it was able to maintian the stable status for a very long period of time, so that it is beneficial to its economic development

中国北京大学国际关系学院 院长 王缉思:

欧洲移民到了美国以后,等于是在一个新大陆上建立了一个崭新的国家。这样的一个国家,它有一个至高无上的《宪法》,在《宪法》下面有一套很完整的法制体系,通过这个权力制衡,相对来说呢,就推动了社会生产力的发展。

Wang (Director of Institute for International Relations, Beijing University -- was said to be a key advisor to Hu Jintao on international affairs, esp to US)

When European immigrants arrived at the American continent, they were building a brand new nation on this new continent. This country has a supreme "constitution", under the "constitution" there is a complete set of legal system, through such a mechanism of power checking [judiciary, excutive and legislative], the productivity of the society was pushed forward.

---

These two key advisors to the programs did not say anything else in the Finale,
and they made explicitly clear what they thought regarding the connection of a "political system" to "economic development"! There is reason to believe that CCP leadership got it, and we are going to witness fundamental changes in China in the coming years, not immediately, but in 3-10 years, step by step, perhaps.


Categories:

The Rise of the Great Nations - a Chinese documentary


"Rise of the Great Nation" 大国崛起 is a new TV documentary aired by China's CCTV this month. It runs in parallel to Paul Kennedy's Rise and Fall of Great Power, and a similar documentary series 18 years ago, The River Elegy (河殇).

  • (Paul Kennedy interview conversations were actually shown in many episodes)
I just finished 4 episodes: (1)Portugal and Spain, (2)Holland, (3)&(4) Britain and (7)Japan. It is well made, with clear message to the path of development for China today (for the government perspective). I will show you this link of discussion and commentaries before I write something of my own. Suffice it to say that
  1. it broke a lot of taboos in China;
  2. it tried hard to look at more fundamental drivers of changes (even though they may be obvious to some of us) and spelled them out quite unambiguously to Chinese audiences; e.g. the honest discussion about the pros and cons of bottom-up vs top-down approach in th development of a nation, and even a favor to the bottom-up approach; the unreserved praise of Freedom and Equality as the definition of a Great Nation in the "France" episode
  3. I have a feeling that it will be more influential than River Elegy, and possibly show us what lessons China's historians and scholars (and perhaps the CCP leaders as well) have learned about these stories. (note: some alleged that this is based on a seminar for the CCP Politburo in 2003, and hence the documentary is probably an idea of the Politburo and a prelude to the next wave of reform in China)
  4. If you have watched the 200th anniversary Bastille day parade in Paris (screenshot above) in that fateful year, you would probably understand why I would compare the Great Nations with River Elegy
More importantly, thanks to the internet we are already able to see it anytime, anywhere, via websites (1-7, 8, 9, 10, 11-12) or bittorrent. The script is available in Wan Rennan' blog.

---

P.S. More in next post.

North Korean Mass Game (long version)

The clip in 5 parts, it is from the "TV Broadcast of the entire "Ever-victorious Workers' Party of Korea" held at the May Day Stadium in Pyongyang, North Korea on September 4, 2001."

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5


---

1) For how this works see State of the Mind clip here
2) Older clips here

---
Military band performance 9/9/2003 (55th DPRK anniversary)


Military band performance 4/25/2002 (70th People's Army anniversary - the army was founded 19 years before the government?)

November 20

Taiwan myth: why DPP stuck with Ah Bian

Paradoxes and contradictions, unbelievable, politics in Taiwan defy our intuition. Ideology, ethnic division often overshadow rationality. They are always myths to the outsiders. Even for people who are familiar with Taiwan, it is a non-trivial task to understand the going-on in Taiwan.

In an interview to Phoenix TV in HK a few weeks earlier, Shih Ming-Teh, the leader of the Red-shirt anti-corrption movement, was puzzled at why Chen Shiu-Bian chose to do what he did. Shih said, "If I were Bian, and suppose Bian is innocent, there is really no reason not to step down while the investigation in under progress. Because, even if Bian is cleared of the corruption charges, because he is still in power while the investigation is in progress, the opposition will find an excuse to accuse him of influencing the investigation. Instead, if he steps down temporarily, and emerged as innocent, he can really prove himself to be clean."

Meanwhile, Ma Ying-jeou is no better. Caught in a similar, although milder, case with Chen's Special Budget mis-use, Ma, a Harvard-trained lawyer, had found the "Anthony Leung wisdom" of thinking that aftermath donation will prove himself clean.

Another myth is about why DPP is willing to bundle itself with Ah Bian and sink with him, and why CSB chose to give up the center and appeal to the deep Green who are his supporterd no matter what. This has puzzled me for a while, until I read this New News article (初選制度,害民進黨變一言堂), the answer lies in DPP's primary nomination system.
  • 一 向大鳴大放的民進黨,成為一言堂,貪瀆的人沒事,批評貪瀆的人反而要被移送中評會,民進黨到底為什麼變成這樣?又怎麼連反都不敢反?有人說,「黨沒有分裂 本錢、天王間的恐怖平衡,保住了扁的地位。最佳切割點應在年底北高選舉後。」立委黃偉哲表示:「病人在病重時,是否適合再做大手術?」
  • 但 其實,追根究柢起來,明年的「立委初選」就是他們自我閹割的癥結。一位同樣不願具名的南部立委不諱言地表示:「黨內各個有意參選的人,為了順利爭取提名出 線,現在的﹃不語﹄是理所當然的。因為他必須考慮到後果,如果得罪了深綠選民,絕對在初選中討不到便宜。」民進黨的初選制度,是採三○%的黨內黨員投票; 加上七○%的民調為基礎來決定候選人。
  • 不過,如果是考慮初選,由深綠主控的黨員投票目前祇占三○%;具決定性的還是七○%的民調,雖然淺綠與中間選民已傾向不表態,又為什麼沒人考慮「造反」,以呼喚出這群不表態的選民衝高民調數字呢?
  • 最 主要的原因是,民調公司的尋找和題目的設計、訂定,都由黨中央決定,而黨中央一片保扁意識,與黨中央作對會有什麼下場?再者,民進黨前民調中心主任吳祥榮 表示,今年的全代會確定明年立委初選的民調採用新的方式,也就是「排藍式民調」,亦即,會在題目中設計一題題目,問受訪者的政黨傾向,如為支持泛藍者,就 不予採用,這是「為了確保初選勝出的候選人,確實受到民進黨支持者的認同。」他曾說:「以往沒有將支持藍軍的樣本數排掉,容易造成選出來的代表有代表性不 足的問題。敵對方會刻意在民調上支持某人,但此人在真正代表民進黨出來參選時並不會當選,所以現階段的民調方式需做改變。」
  • 但這樣的改 變雖使得提名人更為「正綠軍」,卻也使得板塊不大的深綠選民,除了穩穩控制住黨員投票這一部分的結果外,也可以將力量延伸至另外的七○%,這也就是為什 麼,陳水扁與保扁的黨中央都清楚,祇要控制深綠,就扼制了派系與有意參選公職的人的咽喉。這樣的邏輯,就可以理解為什麼民進黨這次會如此表現。
Basically, the reasoning goes, everyone who wants the party resources in his next election has to stick with the party line (i.e. CSB apologetic). Because the deep Green determines whether you would get the party nomination or not. Although the DPP nomination takes 30% party votes, and 70% public opinion poll, the public poll design is flawed, and rejects any sample from Blue-supporters, and defeats the purpose of being a poll for supports from voters outside the party. Hence, in reality only deep Green opinions were counted. Hence, CSB chose to speak Taiwanese dialect instead of Mandarin which has much wider audience. All senior DPP members chose to sink with Ah Bian even though that alienates themselves with the central voters and guarantee election defeat, because they would not even obtain party nomination otherwise.

N.B.
1) the reason for excluding Blue samples is to prevent Blue-supporters from influencing DPP into picking the 'wrong' candidate -- but the logic is flawed, since the true conspirator will not reveal that he supports the other party in such polls. A better approach is probably to employ a neutral party for the survey or do not reveal the purpose of the poll
2) KMT has adopted a similar nomination mechanism, with 30% in party and 70% public poll weights. But I do not know if the so called "public poll" deliberately exclude some people

Kuril earthquake informations

The Kuril quake is 8.3 in Richter scale according to USGS, i.e., 10^(-0.8)=1/6 the energy of the 9.1 quake in Sumatra 2 years ago that caused the monster tsunami, and 10^(8.3-4)=10^4.3=20000 times the North Korea (alleged) "nuclear" test last month.

Magnitude 8.3 (Great)
Date-Time
  • Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 11:14:16 (UTC) = Coordinated Universal Time
  • Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 10:14:16 PM = local time at epicenter Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones
  • Location 46.616°N, 153.224°E
    Depth 28.5 km (17.7 miles)
    Region KURIL ISLANDS
    Distances 440 km (275 miles) ENE of Kuril'sk, Kuril Islands 500 km (310 miles) SSW of Severo-Kuril'sk, Kuril Islands, Russia 1650 km (1030 miles) NE of TOKYO, Japan 7185 km (4460 miles) NE of MOSCOW, Russia
    Location Uncertainty horizontal +/- 7.1 km (4.4 miles); depth +/- 8.2 km (5.1 miles)
    Parameters Nst=213, Nph=213, Dmin=812.9 km, Rmss=1.05 sec, Gp= 65°, M-type=moment magnitude (Mw), Version=9
    Source USGS NEIC (WDCS-D)
    Event ID usvcam

    Many strong after-quakes were detected around 153-155E, 46-48N.


    There are many reasons that the tsunami is much weaker this time.
    1. Weaker quake (of 1/6 the strength)
    2. Deeper epicenter (28.5km below surface)
    3. Direction of the quake was not as vertical as that in Sumatra
    The location of the quake is right on the rim of on the Pacific Techtonic Plate, and in the middle of Kuril Island Chain, between the south tip of Kamchatka and NE Hokkaido. in (also November) 1952 a 9.0 quake struck the SE tip of Kamchatka, about 600km NE of the epicenter of today's quake. If there is a simple trend, then 54 years later, people in Hokkaido should be very vigilant.

    Light viewing: Chen Shui Bian as Ukulele (忧客李林)

    Ukulele is a Hawaiian 4-string guitar. It is also the name of a very popular band in Taiwan (优客李林), of two musicians with last name Li and Lin. The most famous song by this band is called Admitting Mistake (认错) (right click to save) - downloadable via Baidu's mp3 search.

    When the ROC legislators Li Wen-chung and Lin Cho-shui resigned from the Legislative Yuan, the most entertaining TV program in greater China, People's Pot aka Quanmin Da Menggui (全民大悶鍋), produced this hilarious clip. Enjoy.

    總統府就是你家 前立委 林鐲水

    1. CNN introduction of the program Mengguo here.
    2. For latest clip of Mengguo fgrom Youtube use this link.

    Blogspot blocked again in China around Oct 25 - site stats

    Y-axis represents the number of visits for the 4 week period from Oct 4 to Oct 31, normalized at the total # visits on Oct 4 as 100. Around October 25-26 visits from mainland China were blocked, ISP by ISP.

     
    No list items have been added yet.