Author: ceciliazhang

Could US military bring coronavirus to Wuhan?   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Post time 2020-4-11 17:11:40 |Display all floors
wchao37 Post time: 2020-4-11 12:13
I believe the Chinese people do not have the mindset to embrace any conspiracy theory either.

Tha ...

  Buddy, the bone of the contention is whether  Trump and some hardliners' personal views  represent American public opinion. The answer is no.  Most Americans haven't hitherto accepted  rumors concerning Wuhan and  the Military Games;  all the articles related to such events  may have been  originally written by some snooty, chest-thumping nationalists whose views are  colored by national impulses and ideological differences.  

  You know it's truly hard for a philistine like me to help you figure out the intricacies of America's ideological squabble between left-wing supporters and right-wing supporters or even between conservatives who belong to different camps. Let me give a try.  Ordinarily, people are talking about  Burkean conservatism-which is developed by Edmund Burke-when they talk about conservatism. Proponents of Burkean conservatism hanker after traditional conservative values such as the the preservation of order, the critical role that family, religion or other institutions play in maintaining order, and the conception of small government that respects the rights of individual and property rights. Present-day Burkean conservatives also subscribe  to   free markets, Trump's tax cuts  and, surprise,  globalization, for which even some Trump's supporters uphold.

  On the contrary, fans of neoconservatism tend to be hawks who argue that America should strive to ramp up its military capabilities in order to see off potential rivals trying to flex their muscles. And this kind of thinking became the rationale for America to pivot to  the  so-called containment policy; that's how America treated the old Soviet Union, which disintegrated  after its economic and social systems seized up; some neoconservatives, wary of China's rise,  are calling for Trump's government to do the same to China. Yet such efforts haven't made headway since China and America's financial interests are intertwined. That's why they are making a case that now it's time for America to decouple from China. To my way of thinking, this branch of conservatism is not that horrible and objectionable compared with other branches of radical conservatism that want to uproot the foundations of old-school conservatism. A writer calls it the new  American right.

  Supporters of the  new American right are not just fire-breathing nationalists who don't mind using force to get what they want like some neoconservatives; in a way, some of them are the  fans of anarchy and isolationism, particularly integralism championed by  Adrian Vermeule, who  wants to create a new social system wherein the notion that  authority and hierarchy, and  "Vermeulian" morality take precedence over individuality will  be shared by every citizen; property rights will give away to collective ownership;  and   unelected bureaucrats will be chosen to run a nation like America. In a nutshell, this kind of contrarian conservatism raises an eyebrow at the idea that Americans should be beholden to the government
Some supporters of the  new American right are entranced by the idea that leaders like Trump should seize on the class antagonism or social divides, since it plays into the hands of Trump. I think what they are trying to say is Trump has to drive a wedge between the haves and the have nots instead of promoting solidarity, lest they band together to tilt at  Trump's leadership.

  Now you know that even conservatives in America are not united at all. Thus, it's understandable for them to  eulogise Trump or  slate them as supporters of different schools of conservatism. Likewise, you don't even have to express bafflement at the fact that some conservatives also cuddle up to China when their states need to sell something to China.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Post time 2020-4-11 17:20:30 |Display all floors
hus, it's understandable for them to  eulogise Trump or  slate  Trumpism as supporters of different schools of conservatism.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Post time 2020-4-11 18:51:33 |Display all floors
   the critical role that family, religion or other institutions plays

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2020-4-11 18:54:37 |Display all floors
More than 15,000 people in the United States have died in the coronavirus pandemic, according to the Johns Hopkins University running tally on Thursday.

The tally leapt to 15,774 dead from 432,596 cases, as the US struggles to combat the spread of virus


As I said, a huge bloodstain is on this man's hands.  

A disproportionally large percentage of NYC's COPID-19-related deaths belong to the Hispanic and Black populations.

Trump and his supporters must be rejoicing over this fact -- instead of spending huge medical resources to take care of the Baby Boom Generation and minority populations throughout the country, which is beyond the capacity of its present public-health system, the COPID-19 virus is doing the job for them by eliminating that segment of the U.S. population that Trump is frantically erecting a wall for deterrence purposes.  


That makes his laments about the death tally as irrelevant as Henry Sidgwick's reference to "Utility and Common-sense Morality"in his book "Method of Ethics" in characterizing J.S. Mill's indirect version of utilitarianism.

Two days ago I saw a picture of a recuperating 86-year old COPID-19 patient being rolled out on a hospital gurney by his physician to take a look at a beautiful sunset in Wuhan.  The ultimate respect paid to just an ordinary old resident of that pandemic-stricken city is indicative and reminiscent of the humanitarian spirit of Chinese civilization itself.

Contrast this with the mind-boggling mean spirit of the Trump Administration to sacrifice the country's current generation of senior citizens using the pandemic as a manifestation of the Law of the Jungle, as was shown by the words of an elderly Texan politician who declared on FOX News that he would be willing to die (in view of inadequate medical resources such as ECMO machines) and make way for the younger generation to rebuild the U.S. economy should he become infected with the virus.  

Trump applauded the oldster's FOX-TV declaration as reflecting his own interpretation of Social Darwinism, proving that birds of a feather do flock together.

Imagine that kind of heartless statement coming from the highest elected official of a nation that used to boast of itself as representing that "Beacon of Light on the Hill."

Even Henry Kissinger came out to oppose that kind of mindset when he stated that in the post-COVID world each nation's political system will be evaluated by how well it had met the sudden challenges posed by the coronavirus during the pandemic.

China thinks of her pool of senior citizenry as her greatest reservoir of wisdom that helps in guiding the development of the nation.

Trump's attitude makes one shiver with the realization that he doesn't believe he'll become old just around the corner, and that he is more utilitarian than Orthodox Utilitarians.



Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2020-4-11 19:55:29 |Display all floors
tatata69 Post time: 2020-4-11 17:11
Buddy, the bone of the contention is whether  Trump and some hardliners' personal views  represe ...

It’s funny that you mention Vermeule, who co-founded the book review magazine called The New Rambler.  As a constitutional and administrative law professor, he was instrumental in the theoretical development of the so-called institutional design.  

Academics like him suffer most when they encounter anti-intellectual buffoons like Trump, who listens neither to the medical or legal experts’ opinions on how to stem the pandemic and the upcoming recession of the American economy.  

I think he is a little too dogmatic as a Harvard law professor when he tried to force his legal concept of “common good constitutionalism” or "moral values of the religious right" down the throat of ordinary Americans whatever their individual convictions might be.  Remember that he was opposed to the liberal ideal of church-state division when he became like you are mentioning here, an advocate of Integralism.  

I've always had a distaste for mid-life concerts to Catholicism as in the case of Vermeule, but I like the idea espoused by believers in Integralism that public life could be an extension of an interior life.  

I feel Chinese legalists like Han Fei Zi 韩非子 and 商鞅 tended not to look at things in absolute terms, and in general didn’t feel comfortable when state officials tried to enforce any doctrine similar to Integralism in which public life and interior life are mutually exclusive (a school of thought suggesting that anything that is not the "interior life" belongs to the public life domain, or that the latter is merely an extension of the former).  

This is because Chinese civilization regards theology as a part of scholarly pursuit but always in human form.  To them, it is highly disturbing to believe even today that someone could be the outcome of a virgin birth.  In medicine, the division is even more apparent.  My take is that as long as it works – as in the case of using traditional Chinese medicine for treating COPID-19 patients, I am all for it.  

As to Vermeule’s recent suggestion that the country needs to take a new look at the idea of originalism of the Constitution, I think his viewpoint is valid because to me the old-school interpretation of the meaning of the American Constitution as having been fixed at the moment of its enactment is the cause of its interference of many outdated laws on issues such as abortion, etc.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2020-4-11 20:42:55 |Display all floors

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 3Rank: 3

Post time 2020-4-11 22:55:32 |Display all floors
wchao37 Post time: 2020-4-11 19:55
It’s funny that you mention Vermeule, who co-founded the book review magazine called The New Ramb ...

  Thanks for the tip. I'd argue that most ancient Chinese thinkers living in antiquity set store by a school of thought developed by Laozi or 老子, who apprised his followers that human beings would do well to let things run its own course since everything is governed by the natural order, a harmonious world thanks to the existence of yin and yang. Zeno of Citium,  the philosopher who founded Stoicism  in the Athens, held a similar idea, arguing that "world is governed by a divine “logos”, or law, which orders everything."  The Stoics suggested accepting what happens to us, good or bad just like some Chinese thinkers who are   still sympathetic to Taoism or the so-called 无为而治: the conception  just let things run its own course without interfering it.

  Yet this kind of thinking has been carpeted by other Chinese bright minds, who argue that doing nothing is by no means a commendable choice when faced with thorny issues, particularly if we are talking about business leaders who need to get to grips with pesky issues with  alacrity instead of resorting to dilatory tactics or palming such problems off to someone else.  Amazon's founder, Jeff Bezos, seems to be the supporter of the second camp: he cares about the level of attentiveness with which Amazon's top brass and division heads treat intractable problems and decision-making. Ram Charan, a management guru who wrote a book about Amazon's decision-making, argues that Amazon's high velocity decision-making goes a long way towards helping Amazon boost productivity and shedding  bureaucracy, turning it into a flat organization sans of silos, just like the world depicted by Thomas Friedman in his bestselling book The World Is Flat. Thomas Friedman makes a case that globalisation and advances in technology, for the most part, have leveled the playing field, giving the needy a chance to enjoy lots of benefits wrought by the prevalent across-border trade.

  To be fair, the world in which Laozi lived was different. Then  people living in China had no knowledge of the existence of Roman Empire and the culture of Greece. More to the point,  China consisted of several big and lots of small  "nations" that  were embroiled in many vehement  battles designed to annex each other's land way back,  which was a period called 春秋. At the time, ancient wits like Laozi were also preaching the virtues of morality,  self-restraint, and education, thinking that reading books was the only way for people to slough off their ignorance; some thought it was a perfect opportunity for them to be part of  officialdom.

  Regardless, there is no denying that was a golden age for genuine intellectuals because people only begrudged one's erudition and only respected people reading books. Now it seems to be a different world, a world where online celebs use the internet to rake in gobs of money and gain clout. Just take a gander at those garden-variety and even crummy  video clips produced by some online celebs, who don't scruple to use pranks to make fun of innocent people. They often post lots of music video clips featuring songs with cloying lyrics and sexy dance routines, with  scantily-clad lasses dressing like characters from anime movies. Little wonder that the internet has been infantilised.  

  I need to watch Teletubbies now. LOL.  

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.