Apparently, there are those in China who believe that the more people show up for a funeral, the more the dead person is honored - so they have strippers and other entertainments to draw a crowd. Wealthy people can apparently draw quite a crowd, as the article points out.
This doesn't look like it would go over so well in the Bible belt, eh?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Does it go over well with you? I don't think it is necessary to be a fundamentalist Christian to believe that strippers at funerals are tacky.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Well that takes the "Fun" right out of Funeral, doesn't it? I guess they have to start calling them "'erals" now.
Pix
(honestly, strippers don't sound like fun to me anyway...)
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
If stippers aren't allowed, what about men pulling their pants off when they are flaming at a funeral. True story, one of my dad's cousins once set the zipper of his polyester pants on fire at a family funeral.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Lol, Pix.
Personally, I'd have no problem if someone wanted to have strippers at their funeral - the phrase "hey, it's your funeral" comes to mind. Tacky or not, though, if the goal of the funeral is to attract as many people as possible, I'd say go with whatever works - and strippers apparently were working, judging from the 200 attendees.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
So their culture is different than ours, big whoop. I fail to see how this is any more horrifying than, say, the idea of dressing 6 year old girls up in provocative costumes and awarding them prizes based on their sex appeal.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Good thing it didn't happen in China, breyerchic, or he might have spent the night in the lockup. Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
Actually I don't think that was possible, the sherrif had just died (being one of my great uncles) the town had no police, and no deputy because he had been the deputy when the last sherrif died three weeks earlier, he became sheriff. The whole week was a mess, I think some family member even thought about robbing a bank Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
FlyingCow: What are you talking about? There is no such thing as a bible belt in China, or ANY belt for that matter. There isnt a single consentration of ANY organized religion in mainland China as religion is more or less ILLEGAL.
I am sure it follows that China is the paragon of what a society can accomplish when unfettered by organized religion right?
I am sure there are people who think (If there are more people the dead person is more honored). But I am sure there are just as many that think, "These people are only here to stare at the strippers and they dont give a damn about the deceased."
Why should religion have anything to do with it?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
BB: no, there are several large religious movements, including a state-sponsored version of the Catholic Church (that Rome vigorously opposes). Only religions that are viewed as subversive (or similar) are illegal. This is very bad, but it is a far cry from religion being illegal or absent.
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
I was partial to ST:TNG's take on Riker's mistimed funeral.
Strippers would have fit right in there, right along with the cake, booze, and jazz.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Oh man, whew! When I saw the thread title, I thought you meant in America!
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by vonk: Oh man, whew! When I saw the thread title, I thought you meant in America!
No, no. It's okay. You can still have strippers at YOUR funeral. I mean, sheesh, this is AMERICA.
-pH
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
quote: I was partial to ST:TNG's take on Riker's mistimed funeral.
Strippers would have fit right in there, right along with the cake, booze, and jazz.
The first time I ever saw that episode, I decided that that was what I wanted for my funeral!
Posted by Nell Gwyn (Member # 8291) on :
I was under the impression that FlyingCow was talking about how the idea of having strippers at funerals would be received in the Bible belt of America, not anything about religion in China. I could be wrong, but that's how I interpreted it.
Posted by IndigoKnight1 (Member # 9526) on :
Does this mean that no one is coming to my tacky stripper-ridden funeral?
They won't know what to do with the loss of revenue. By the same token, however, the girls at the bank won't have to worry about counting all those dollar bills left for deposit.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Thank you, Nell. You get three points for reading comprehension. BlackBlade will get the check for "Improve reading comprehension" on his report card.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I got it. I think it was tacky. You took an article about China as a chance to make a cheap shot at an American group.
If the comment was about a group in China, at least it would have been relevant.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Oy. No cheap shot intended.
I was taking a funny article I saw on the web and pointing out a big difference between Chinese and American cultures - specifically in more rural parts of the country where one might find a lot of farmers.
If you look to find offense, you will normally find it.
Here there wasn't meant to be any.
I could have just as easily said "That wouldn't go over so well with America's Puritanical culture" - but that wouldn't have been a cheap shot at Puritans.
Unless you happened to be Puritan, kat, in which case I'm sure you'd take offense. You seem quick to.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: BB: no, there are several large religious movements, including a state-sponsored version of the Catholic Church (that Rome vigorously opposes). Only religions that are viewed as subversive (or similar) are illegal. This is very bad, but it is a far cry from religion being illegal or absent.
While all true, you are presenting it alittle inaccurately. "Only religions that are viewed as subversive (or similar) are illegal." With the exception of Buddhism and to a lesser extent Taoism (even some forms of those are considered "subversive") EVERY religion is considered subversive.
Its so bad that when foreigners attend church at say somebodies house, and a Chinese man/woman shows interest and would like to attend, they have to be turned away lest the religions name is tarnished in the govt's mind, and the govt cracks down on it.
Ignore some of the more difficult to believe tenants, and read purely the basic idea behind the belief and how terribly the Chinese govt cracked down on it.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*sigh* I'm not offended. I think it's tacky, but that's different from being offended.
Maybe I'm just dissapointed, but "religious Americans sure don't like strippers!" doesn't seem like the most insightful comment to make at that point. I don't like a dislike of the idea of strippers at funerals is confined to fundamentalist Christians, and I don't think that if someone objects to going to strip clubs in general, the funeral is not what is going to tip them over the edge here.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
It was tacky FC. You are being insensitive and stereotyping. Just imagine all of those strippers with rent to pay and no funerals to work. And here you are laughing at them. For shame.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
quote:With the exception of Buddhism and to a lesser extent Taoism (even some forms of those are considered "subversive") EVERY religion is considered subversive.
Perhaps you should reread my post and do a little research instead of continuing to state things that are easily verifiably incorrect.
All these people attending mass at a Catholic cathedral in Beijing must be delusional: http://www.denniscox.com/beijing.htm (its a ways down the page).
Note that Islam is another officially recognized religion (along with Buddhism, Taoism, Protestantism, and Catholicism).
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
You said:
quote:You took an article about China as a chance to make a cheap shot at an American group.
I did no such thing.
Then you backpedaled off accusing me of taking a shot at a good number of posters on this board to say that you were merely disappointed that the post wasn't "insightful".
I wasn't trying to be insightful, kat. Nor was I intending offense. I was trying to tie a Chinese article into an American frame of mind.
You have a region of Chinese farmers who feel this is perfectly fine, it seems, and a government that does not. Our heartland farmers would balk at the prospect, as would our government (the difference being that hopefully our government wouldn't legislate restrictions on funeral arrangements). Quite a difference, and it opened up a domestic avenue of discussion for a foreign event.
The Bible Belt is just the most concentrated center of American conservative values, which is why I used that reference. It wasn't a cheap shot, or meant to be any sort of shot. It was an observation, and based on everything I've ever understood or experienced regarding the Bible Belt region of the US, it was a correct obvservation. Such an event would certainly not go over very well there.
It might go over a lot more smoothly in, say, Las Vegas. Note, that's not a cheap shot at Las Vegas. I focused on the conservative part of the country, as they would have the most extreme reaction.
quote:I don't [think] a dislike of the idea of strippers at funerals is confined to fundamentalist Christians, and I don't think that if someone objects to going to strip clubs in general, the funeral is not what is going to tip them over the edge here.
Never said it was confined to fundamentalist Christians.
So, sorry to disappoint you with the lack of insight, but the comment was never meant to be a cheap shot.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I apologize. I thought that it was. Thank you for the correction.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
fugu13: I lived 11 years in Hong Kong, and have been to mainland China 4 times. I lived in Taiwan for 2, and I have done alot of China related study in my spare time. But even with all that background I read what ALOT of China experts write concerning China.
Catholics in China according to your own link are no allowed to pledge allegience to the Pope. If there was a new Testament equivalent to the situation in China it would be Christians who were not allowed to recognize Jesus as the head of the church, but its OK they can still pray to his father. I am sure God appreciates the faithfulness of Chinese catholics in trying to be Christians with such an oppressive govt. But the fact remains that a Catholic Church without a Pope basically removes an essential part of their religion.
Protestants in China are an even more interesting situation. The only way to be a protestant in China is if you belong to the "Three-Self Patriotic Movement" If you do not belong to them then you must practice at home privately, and you can expect arrest if you try to speak to others about your religion. Bible distribution is only allowed through the Three Self Patriotic Movement, otherwise unauthorized distribution is often accompanied with jail time.
edit: To put in perspective look at the situation that is American Christianity. If you mashed us all together there would be inavoidable problems. There are just too many differences beyond Catholic/Protestant.
End of Edit...
Islam is recognized because in Northwest China there is a moderately sized (ethnically different than Han Chinese) group of Muslims. They are more closely related to eastern Europeans and possibly Mongolians. They found themselves under absolute communist rule when the Guo Min Dang were ousted. Its pretty easy to be Muslim when there is no Caliph. You can bet if Islam had some sort of centralized leader like Mohammed, China would let them be Muslim as long as they didnt pledge allegience to Him.
The groups must operate under a nonreligion label, and not try to talk about religion with the people they are working with.
I agree that the religious situation in China is FAR better than it used to be. But the way it is right now is still intolerable. Being unable to be a Communist Party member if you are religious by itself is very wrong.
[ August 28, 2006, 04:14 PM: Message edited by: BlackBlade ]
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
I can live with a stripper ban. But, if there is no Dixieland band at my funeral, I'm not coming.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote: Catholics in China according to your own link are no allowed to pledge allegience to the Pope. If there was a new Testament equivalent to the situation in China it would be Christians who were not allowed to recognize Jesus as the head of the church, but its OK they can still pray to his father. I am sure God appreciates the faithfulness of Chinese catholics in trying to be Christians with such an oppressive govt. But the fact remains that a Catholic Church without a Pope basically removes an essential part of their religion.
This paragraph makes no sense to me. Catholics don't "pledge allegience" to the Pope. We do consider Jesus to be the head of the Church and "New Testament equivalent" confuses me. How are we less "New Testament" than other Christians? I would appreciate it if you could clarify what you mean.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote: Catholics in China according to your own link are no allowed to pledge allegience to the Pope. If there was a new Testament equivalent to the situation in China it would be Christians who were not allowed to recognize Jesus as the head of the church, but its OK they can still pray to his father. I am sure God appreciates the faithfulness of Chinese catholics in trying to be Christians with such an oppressive govt. But the fact remains that a Catholic Church without a Pope basically removes an essential part of their religion.
This paragraph makes no sense to me. Catholics don't "pledge allegience" to the Pope. We do consider Jesus to be the head of the Church and "New Testament equivalent" confuses me. How are we less "New Testament" than other Christians? I would appreciate it if you could clarify what you mean.
Perhaps I am wrong, but I was under the impression that in Catholic Docterine the Pope is the Vicar of Christ. That the Pope has the "keys of the kingdom" as passed to him by his predecesors all the way to Christ. This authorizes the Poper to be the spokesman for God as neccesary.
By pledge allegiance, I did not mean you read something similar to the American pledge of allegiance, merely that if the Pope says, "Thus sayeth the Lord" Catholics believe he is speaking for God, and not just his own opinion. I would appreciate any correction you can offer me regarding what I said about Catholicism.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I specifically noted that Catholicism in China is not Catholicism as most of the world knows it when I brought it up. It is, however, a religion that is acceptable to the state that is neither Buddhist nor Taoist.
I think what China does regarding religion is awful (as I have stated). However, it remains incorrect to say that
quote:There is no such thing as a bible belt in China, or ANY belt for that matter. There isnt a single consentration of ANY organized religion in mainland China as religion is more or less ILLEGAL.
or
quote:With the exception of Buddhism and to a lesser extent Taoism (even some forms of those are considered "subversive") EVERY religion is considered subversive.
They're both your words, and they could contradict each other (depending on what your definitions of 'concentration' and 'organized' are).
Even the comparatively small religion of state Catholicism, at 5 million members, would be a concentration in my book. That's around how many pentecostals or episcopalians there are in the US, and more than those who are Jewish or LDS. Its also most definitely an organized religion, though it also definitely is not Catholicism as commonly understood.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Fugu13: I agree that the 2 quotes of mine that you cited are alittle bit extreme and smell a bit of exaggeration. Its a reflex of mine that seems to come into play when what China does to people's civil rights is downplayed. I know that that was not your intention.
I do not accept the concept of organized religion in China because none of the groups are given the freedom to express themselves as they see fit. They are required to accept dictation from the gov't. If the govt in China decided that there was a particular tenet within say protestantism that challenged the control of the communist party, they would demand its removal from the bible and from discourse. If the protestants resisted the govt would steam roll over the whole religion and completely obliterate it.
If you think govt controled organized religion is still a religion, you can disagree with me, I suppose it could be called 2nd rate religion. But I think its just as bad, possibly worse than the average religiously controlled govt.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Sorry for jumping down your throat, kat, but I wanted it to be very clear to the board (specifically those who live in the Bible Belt) that offense was not my intent.
Posted by Theaca (Member # 8325) on :
I thought Catholicism was as underground as the other banned religions in China. Aren't underground priests arrested when discovered? And I thought 92 members of an underground Catholic church were recently arrested.
Also, I'm not sure how telling the Catholics of China not to follow the pope's guidance would actualy result in Catholics not following the pope considering that much of what they pray, think, and even do are hidden from the eye of the government.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Thanks for the clarification. The Pope thing doesn't quite work that way. He doesn't have magical access or anything. While Jesus is the head of the Church, the Pope is sort of like the CEO. The Pope, along with the Bishops, theologian and the laity does make determinations on doctrine, but it is a very rare and unusual thing for him to speak infallibly. As a matter of fact, it has only happened twice ever.
edit to add: There wasn't a Pope (as we think of it today) in early Catholicism. While important, I personally wouldn't consider it essential.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
I am not a frequenter of strip clubs, and it is not just because I am under age. However, I have no problems with a culture that has a different view of public nudity than my own, the problem here seems to be a syncretic one, with, if I understand it correctly, western-style strippers as part of a traditional Chines funeral, not in itself a problem, but using strippers as an attraction to a funeral does seem rather tacky. Not grounds for government intervention, but tacky.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: I am not a frequenter of strip clubs, and it is not just because I am under age. However, I have no problems with a culture that has a different view of public nudity than my own, the problem here seems to be a syncretic one, with, if I understand it correctly, western-style strippers as part of a traditional Chines funeral, not in itself a problem, but using strippers as an attraction to a funeral does seem rather tacky. Not grounds for government intervention, but tacky.
Pel having a dialogue with a conservative communist in China about when it is proper for the government to intervene would make for some interesting reading.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I almost neglected to mention, there's also Tibetan Buddhism -- an organized, concentrated form of Buddhism, albeit also a state religion in China.
The definition of organized religion has nothing to do with government control thereof as I understand it. Organized religion is commonly understood as religion with at least a minimal hierarchy; religion that is practiced beyond the home.
Also, I suspect there are at least some people in China who do adhere to one of the state religions, and do not view them as second-best to what they are knockoffs of. Who are we to say that person is not religious because the state sponsors their religion?
Of course, it is not entirely correct to say that the state controls the religion. The state places controls on the religion, but so do we, though our controls are considerably more relaxed. China goes much further, and I think far too far, but the government does not dictate all positions of religious hierarchies. It partly becomes a question of where to draw the line; there are state religions in most European countries, for instance, with tithings collected by the government and official sponsorship by the government, though notably less influence by the government over certain issues. How does the Anglican Church (at various points in its existence) fit into your definition? Is it a religion now? Was it ever not a religion? If both are yes, when did the changeover occur?
Theaca: China has two Catholicisms. The state-run one, and the one we commonly think of by that name. The state-run one is largely identical, and many of its followers are likely (mainstream) Catholics bending to the will of the state, but it does not acknowledge the authority of Rome, has a few different positions on issues the Chinese government cares about, and has priests and other members of the hierarchy appointed by the government and the communist party. Rome regularly excommunicates members of the hierarchy of state Catholicism, from bishops on up.
I understand you don't view the state religions as religions, but I don't see what reasonable basis you have for this. Here's an example counterargument -- there are religions where the head of the religion is an absolute authority. If the head of the religion says something is so, it is so (until contradicted by the head of the religion ). In the state religions of China, the government takes on at least part of the role of that head of religion.
Note that there are non-state religions that obey the words of someone who is not a member of that religion, such as Rastafarianism and Haile Selassie (who was viewed as an incarnation of their god).
People can believe in those state religions much as someone believes in other religions.
Again, I think what China does with regard to religion is atrocious, but saying state Catholicism and state Tibetan Buddhism and other belief systems aren't religions seems to be counterproductive and insulting to the beliefs of anyone who does believe in those versions.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Do not even get me started on Tibetan Buddhism, it has the same problem as Catholicism in China. The Dalai Lhama is NOT to be revered in China. His picture is even banned there.
Understand I am not saying religion in China is "2nd rate" because the people are not faithful. I am saying its 2nd rate because the government presumes to force itself at the top of the hierarchy.
You call it "State Sponsored" religion, I call it "State Controlled" religion. One sounds nicer than the other, but I think the 2nd is more accurate.
The Government does not ASSIST religion in ANY way in China. If you were to tally up what the government has done for religion and put it up against what they have done AGAINST religion. You would have a list the size of a sheet of paper next to a list the size of the Great Wall itself.
Fa Lun Gong is a perfect example. They had a centralized leader, who did not tell them to disobey the govt but then the govt wanted to appoint lackeys to be in direct control of the movement, the people didnt want that. The assembled in large #'s and peacefully protested and requested that the govt leave them alone. Zhang Zi Min pacified them with promises of freedom. Is Fa Lun Gong around today? Why yes it is, in Hong Kong where they have 41 years left of self governance and Taiwan where the American military is the only thing in the way of oblivion.
Everyone else is either in reeducation labor camps, or forced to denounce the religion.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"Pel having a dialogue with a conservative communist in China about when it is proper for the government to intervene would make for some interesting reading."
I am willing if you can find a conservative communist equaly willing.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I am not a frequenter of strip clubs, and it is not just because I am under age. However, I have no problems with a culture that has a different view of public nudity than my own, the problem here seems to be a syncretic one, with, if I understand it correctly, western-style strippers as part of a traditional Chines funeral, not in itself a problem, but using strippers as an attraction to a funeral does seem rather tacky. Not grounds for government intervention, but tacky.
Let me point out that the fact that strippers are succesfully used to attract people to the funerals means that their view of nudity can't be that much different.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
quote:No more strippers at funerals
Then what's the point in dieing then?
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
If more people enjoyed strippers, there would be a lot fewer misunderstandings.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
On the subject of Tibetan Buddhism, I can't say I blame the Chinese for banning it. It really was a rather feudal, oppressive religion. Ask the peasants how they feel about not having to 'tithe' half their income to the local monastery.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
KoM: while the Chinese basically banned it for a while, they now attempt to use it as a tool of the state, and even encourage participation (edit: which is probably worse than banning it).
And it was a rather feudal religion, but I suspect you'll find the peasants were even worse off under Chinese rule for at least the next couple decades (these are the ones who weren't killed outright, which happened a lot as people clung to the practices and loyalties of Tibetan Buddhism).
[ August 29, 2006, 07:17 AM: Message edited by: fugu13 ]
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
I bet there will be stripper's at Hugh Heffner's funeral. And I think that would be highly appropriate. Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
The Bunnies are not strippers! They are models!
Not that I care or anything...
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: On the subject of Tibetan Buddhism, I can't say I blame the Chinese for banning it. It really was a rather feudal, oppressive religion. Ask the peasants how they feel about not having to 'tithe' half their income to the local monastery.
Wow, I had no idea that Tibetan Buddhism was run by L. Ron Hubbard.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: On the subject of Tibetan Buddhism, I can't say I blame the Chinese for banning it. It really was a rather feudal, oppressive religion. Ask the peasants how they feel about not having to 'tithe' half their income to the local monastery.
I was not aware of this KOM. Were they coerced into tithing 50% or were they guilted into it?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Those were also the government taxes, so it was a requirement. Tibet was a theocracy.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
This thread has set me to thinking about my grandmother. She has been dead for several years now, but during the last decade or so of her life she went to alot of funerals she said it was phase of life thing, when she was in her twenties she went to lots of weddings, when she was in her 70s and 80s she went to lots of funerals. So I'm trying to imagine my conservative very proper grandmother attending funerals which feature strippers and its just not working.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"Falun_Gong...Ignore some of the more difficult to believe tenets, and read purely the basic idea behind the belief and how terribly the Chinese govt cracked down on it."
quote:The Taiping Rebellion (1851–1864) was perhaps the bloodiest civil war in human history, a clash between the forces of the Qing Empire in China and those inspired by a Hakka self-proclaimed mystic named Hong Xiuquan, a Christian convert who had claimed that he was the new Messiah and younger brother of Jesus Christ.
The Chinese leadership remembers history. One would be very hard pressed to show any meaningful differences between the FalunGong, the Maoist cult, The Righteous and Harmonious Society, and followers of HongXiuquan.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
and all at once. Strippers at funerals???
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: "Falun_Gong...Ignore some of the more difficult to believe tenets, and read purely the basic idea behind the belief and how terribly the Chinese govt cracked down on it."
quote:The Taiping Rebellion (1851–1864) was perhaps the bloodiest civil war in human history, a clash between the forces of the Qing Empire in China and those inspired by a Hakka self-proclaimed mystic named Hong Xiuquan, a Christian convert who had claimed that he was the new Messiah and younger brother of Jesus Christ.
The Chinese leadership remembers history. One would be very hard pressed to show any meaningful differences between the FalunGong, the Maoist cult, The Righteous and Harmonious Society, and followers of HongXiuquan.
Yeah except the Tai Ping Rebellion was a very militant group from the get go, and they almost immedietly started their warpath from the beginning. Hong Xiu Quan said all of China was living in sin and he was sent to purge the world of demons. Mr. Li of Fa Lun Gong exhibited NONE of those ambitions. Even while being attacked he admonished his followers to be none violent and to wait for divine intervention. He instructed them in the use of defensive methods.
The only similarity between the Tai Ping rebellion and Fa Lun Gong is they were both centralized around a leader.
Perhaps the memory of Tai Ping did indeed play some effect, but its Apples and Oranges as far as I am concerned.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
The google ad is advertising a Christian dating service.
I find this quite funny.
(Bible Belt + strippers + google = Christian dating!)
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: "Pel having a dialogue with a conservative communist in China about when it is proper for the government to intervene would make for some interesting reading."
I am willing if you can find a conservative communist equaly willing.
I may not be in China but...
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
ou ou ou .... That would be really entertaining to set up a dialouge between Blayne and Pel. I could even be the moderator, as I'm roughly the same age as them and agree with neither of them on barely anything
I know we're talking about China here, but as I've never been to China I'm not qualified to speak on it. I have, however, been to another Communist country: Vietnam. There are plenty of churches in Vietnam. My grandparents helped start a bunch of them. I actually went to ... I don't remember whether it was protestant or catholic actually, but it was a church service in a church and it was one of the most moving things I've ever experience, even though I didn't understand any of what they were saying. The people's belief and faith were very cool.
And I have nothing to say on the strippers at funerals subject that has not already been said .
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Vietnam started as far more socialist then extreme communist, Ho Chi Minh very much wanted to use he USA consitution in Vietnams and was very moderate, however the refusal of the US to help the Viet Minh and later when they canceled democratic elections in vietnam because they feared that Ho Chi Minh would win overwhelmingly I do not know about him specifically but his party became far more extreme in responce.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Ho Chi Minh very much wanted to use the USA consitution in Vietnam
I have seen very little evidence of this. I could concede that Ho Chi Min wanted to provide some of the civil liberties outlined in the Bill of Rights, but he certainly had no plans for a model of govt based on the US.
quote:the refusal of the US to help the Viet Minh and later when they canceled democratic elections in vietnam because they feared that Ho Chi Minh would win overwhelmingly I do not know about him specifically but his party became far more extreme in response.
You are assigning the US a much too intricate role in these events. Just because the US refused to assist the Viet Minh does not mean the Viet cong hated them for it. Elections fell apart because Ngo Dinh Diem decided to cancel the elections. Ngo Dinh Diem did not care to legitimize his control over south Vietnam and wanted to ceize control over all of it.
Ho Chi Min initially was very much against an armed response to Ngo Dinh Diem policies, but eventually it was clear that Ngo Dinh Diem was not going to negotiate, and both sides became hostile to each other. It was at THIS point that the US initiated "Operation: Rolling Thunder" and stuck its nose in this bombshell.
I admire Ho Chi Min very much, but I honestly think that based on his travels before coming to Vietnam he was firmly in the Communist mindset long before he became the father of modern day Vietnam. His admiration of the US constitution IMO was a stepping stone that led him to adopting more liberal ideas and eventually to Communism.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Wikipedia (being the only verifuable source I can give atm) and various other source do actually point towards the USA for influencing the whole fiasco.
Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :
Good thing I don't live in China. Now I can have strippers at my funeral and get a coffin dance! All right! Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Wikipedia (being the only verifuable source I can give atm) and various other source do actually point towards the USA for influencing the whole fiasco.
Funny I was including the Wikipedia in my list of sources when I wrote that.
Yes the US helped setup the elections and backed the campaign of Ngo Dinh Diem (The Vietcong were all for elections at this point). They also noted that had elections actually taken place 80% of the country would have probably voted for Ho Chi Min. But the US did NOT cancel the elections, Ngo Dinh Diem did of his own volition (it seems likely he knew he would lose). It was only THEN that the US really started to screw things up and start busting out the economic sanctions as well as sending in the military.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
details details so they didnt phsically cancel it they sill recieved encouragement and o a deree influenced by the US to do so.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
and ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
all at once. Strippers at funerals???
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)