Singapore Expats Forum

Filial Piety Revisited

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

User avatar
Wind In My Hair
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2306
Joined: Tue, 19 Jul 2005

Postby Wind In My Hair » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 5:43 pm

ksl wrote:Though we do not know the backgrounds of these children that have passed away, I still don't figure how the Chinese people should take the verbal diarrhea as greed, when it's obviously a cry of desperation of how they are going to manage.

What actually gets up my nose is the fact that many westerners, just haven't got a clue of Chinese culture, so end up with a tit for tat argument.

I'm not agreeing with anyone here, I'm just trying to smooth out those tiny judgemental remarks, which I see as inappropriate.

I think one needs to really look in the mirror and realise that most of us were raised in a competitive market, but have you ever handed over all your money to raise the standards of your whole family.

It is still very normal today for families to share apartments in China and Taiwan and share the cost of living between everyone, this is not typical western way, but with group effort you get strong and powerful with no financial worries knowing that you are all working to achieve something for the whole family. It's a way of life, that westerners really do not comprehend.

If the expected bread winner is the son or daughter, of the parents, that have pumped all their financial wealth into the education has the fundamental basis of family preservation and I say preservation because that's what it is all about. Then it is even more natural that these parents would ask the Chinese government for more compensation.

KSL, I think you are one of the few here who understand the issue. And I respect your ability to withhold judgement.

I'm not sure which is a worse evil - greed for money, or greed for judgement. It bothers me that people are so quick to condemn parents whom they've not even met, whose situation they do not understand, based on so few facts. It's so easy to apply labels of right and wrong, good and bad; and so difficult to try and actually understand.

tyianchang
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue, 25 Jan 2011
Location: uk

Postby tyianchang » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 6:25 pm

k1w1 wrote:
Wind In My Hair wrote:Interesting how the tone of the thread has shifted from "we have as much filial piety as the Chinese" to "the filial piety of the Chinese is repulsive" all because of a news article.


"All because of a news article"? I would have thought it was because of the inconceivable behaviour of the people who claimed they deserved more financial compensation than others...

The issue with this thread came about when people took offense at the original post claiming that filial peity is unheard of in the West. I don't think the tone has changed at all.

I specifically pointed out to Annie that filial peity is not the all-loving, generously-giving situation she was trying to portray at all, and the expectations placed on children are often huge, even detrimental to the children. There can be deep resentment and frustration, in fact.

This is not practiced (to my knowledge) in my culture, but if anyone in my family needed help, they would get it immediately. I think it gets really annoying hearing that Aisan families all take care of each other and Western families just boot each other out into the cold. Right now, my mum is homeless and so is my 85 year old grandfather, after their homes were demolished by the quake. They are both living with my mum's twin sister and her family. There has been no talk of money, and we all know this can go on as long as needed. One of the first things I said to them both was: "come and live with me" as did my cousin and two other aunts. My aunt has asked my grandfather to stay with her permanently and it is unspoken that he could come to any of us who could accomodate him, and very likely will... Is all this filial peity? Maybe, but we don't call it that. We don't call it anything actually.


This isuue had been thrashed out upteen times but really, I am sorry if your feeling of being slighted has gripped you so deeply.
1. It is true that FP as in the Confucian sense and a cotinuous practice among most Chinese, but not all, is 'unheard of' among the average person in the west. That this is fact, is gleaned from schools and among the public and supported by the infrastructure in western countries where pensions and other forms of social security provide the aged ( though this is being undermined more and more so) and retireds with regular incomes and other benefits such as socail welfare and NHS ( some ameneded to being opened to privatisation currently). You might feel slighted for no rhyme or reason other than having some false sense of superiorty. But the fact is, children do not contribute towards their parents' retirement income in the west. Or in SG where there's CPF.
When in time of needs, some parents might not get anything from tehir children; though that rests on individual cases. It's a shame that unacceptably harsh words are constantly used to debase the Chinese community everywhere by some of you either explicitly or by implications.

2. I have thought over the news in your link and these are my concerns.
a. It's not right for any groups to ASK (not demand) for more to be given than others. I can accept your expression of 'disgust' ( even though, the context of parents' losing their children's lives make it rather incredulous)((to someone with human sensitivities;)) but obviously empathies need to transcend identification with race for some, if not many.
b. The quoted speech from Mr Lei does not seem fit in the whole context -and I would like to make further enqueries with the Chinese embassy about this. I'd send a photocopy and ask for verification and explanation in the light of your complaint.
c. From my own expereince with the Chinese, they would not ask for anything. For the embassy to ask for more than the others, it's new to me. And I want to know the truth. Currently, my suspicions are
1. the spokesman might be corrupted
2. there's a new assertiveness regarding material reimbursements
3. the Chinese govt might not know the details or the spokeman acted for the family rather than the country.

As a general rule, I don't believe until proven.
Your argument here is only connected to my op by implication. FP is only possible in the consideration of the treament of children towards their parents; and not even Confucius can decree how children should treat their parents. For you to use the op as a political tool in this context certainly lacks parity; FP comes from bottom up and not top down, except in cases of what goes round comes round.

It's necessary to find out if the Chinese govt considers FP as an additional payment when students or foreign nationals lost their lives in any eathquakes in China. Which would be FAIR enough then.

Lastly, I'm not Annie and we recognise persistent personal insults with delberate misuse of names as racist. This, unfortunately, reflects on you more than anything else. It all begins with self-respect and there're thousands of enlightened people reading this forum so do yourself a service. LOL
Last edited by tyianchang on Wed, 16 Mar 2011 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
tyianchang

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 6:50 pm

tyianchang wrote:[Lastly, I'm not Annie and we recognise persistent personal insults with delberate misuse of names as racist.


Wasn't your other nick Annie? Or was it Anne? How exactly is that racist? Why do you refer to yourself as the the royal 'we'? Everytime you post there are more and more questions. :???:

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 8:22 pm

All because of a news article"? I would have thought it was because of the inconceivable behaviour of the people who claimed they deserved more financial compensation than others...

The issue with this thread came about when people took offense at the original post claiming that filial peity is unheard of in the West. I don't think the tone has changed at all.

The only thing i see with this article is that it sells news, no doubt it is political motivated, like most papers. My point would be why does anyone jump to conclusions. Though the news article are after ratings. know all to well, that sheep follow, they can be manipulated into a frenzy if need be, controversy sells papers and emotions can be played with. Yet no one knows the truth or the facts it's just sensational gossip.

Admittedly there are said grps, that believe in gossip, and that's why they are targeted. Much safer for the blood pressure to remain neutral :-| As life goes on anyway.

Looking at our well advanced systems of development and protection on welfare will just show you were the humanity has gone sadly wrong due too the lack of FP and care, for a poor Polish boy who was taken to UK by his father and left, the boy couln't speak English....so is that enough to disregard what they see and call it an oversight because he couldn't speak English and had no papers!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-ma ... r-12749844

My guess is that no body cares enough to help anyone. I also recall in the 1990's a neighbour of my mother, had no lights on, I didn't know her too well, but i went and asked if everything was okay, she said she doesn't have money for electricity since her husband died, she was 59, the kids some junkies, the rest poor and uneducated living day by day.

She had contacted authorities but nothing was done, they said she would have to wait until the following monday. Though when i called and said my piece they sent someone to turn on the electric, she lost her home as she couldn't pay the mortgage and died the same year of breast cancer. What it tells me is that we have a very cold and calculated society of bureaucratic civil servants, with society just getting more hardened and egoistic and that is sad.
Last edited by ksl on Wed, 16 Mar 2011 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mary Hatch Bailey
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu, 06 Oct 2005
Location: Bedford Falls

Postby Mary Hatch Bailey » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 8:38 pm

ksl wrote:
All because of a news article"? I would have thought it was because of the inconceivable behaviour of the people who claimed they deserved more financial compensation than others...

The issue with this thread came about when people took offense at the original post claiming that filial peity is unheard of in the West. I don't think the tone has changed at all.

The only thing i see with this article is that it sells news, no doubt it is political motivated, like most papers. My point would be why does anyone jump to conclusions. Though the news article are after ratings. know all to well, that sheep follow, they can be manipulated into a frenzy if need be, controversy sells papers and emotions can be played with. Yet no one knows the truth or the facts it's just sensational gossip.

Admittedly there are said grps, that believe in gossip, and that's why they are targeted. Much safer for the blood pressure to remain neutral :-| As life goes on anyway.


It sounds a lot like you're 'shooting the messenger.' It's the oldest trick in the book, to discredit the source.

How can you possibly know it's just 'sensational gossip?' Isn't that exactly as presumptuous as believing it's true? Except of course that the story was picked up a dozen papers around the world which make money by establishing and maintaining their reputations as a credible source of news.

If it's not true, where are the retractions, the lawsuits?

Sure papers have political slants, but that doesn't mean they are wrong. I don't blindly believe everything I read in the New York Times, but ya, I do trust it over your personal 'take' on things.

Neutral? I am not Switzerland, and I am also not a sheep.

What good is low blood pressure when you witness injustice and sit idly by?

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 9:44 pm

I have read the articles and my point is that your opinions along with others are noted, be my guest and fight for what you think is right. My opinion all along as been that NZ shouldn't pay. A countries law and regulations have to be applied, that's it plain and simple.

It doesn't for one moment effect my own thoughts and experience on the facts that I have experienced in mainland China, and also the reason why I said that the government may well ask for more, if you do not ask you do not get.

Doesn't lay the blame on parents seeking retribution from their own government China. If China & NZ have a political issue, there isn't much you can do as a person to influence that decision even if it is a wrong one.

Though I do respect your opinion as one of many. I wrote from a general perspective of how people react to news... Personally I'm not emotionally charged to react and have no reason too either as I have already stated that NZ shouldn't pay as the policy makers have already agreed, on the share out. So what is the point of going on about it. If at all they did pay extra, it would certainly be under the table, so that people like yourself don't get to know. That's politics, I should add that if my tax went towards paying it too, I would also be livid!

3 years working with refugees, opened my eyes to how public funds are abused with authority and by authorities, they only change when they realise the mistakes, not when any person be it 1 or a 10,000 complain.
Refugees where being paid more than what local Danish people were getting at the time, with also more perks, like bicycles and fridges it was pathetic, that any population should pay tax towards these immigrants that are so ungrateful and threatened social workers until they all got it.

One can only blame the system we live in, as they make the rules, if they bend them, they do it for reasons we don't understand. Like the lockerbie
bomber being released early because he had only a month or so to live people are outraged, yet the government does these dirty deals for reasons, probably trade. this is one of many reasons why I say gossip in news papers nearly always have to be verified by other means other than newspapers.
Last edited by ksl on Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34778
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:35 pm

tyianchang wrote:Lastly, I'm not Annie and we recognise persistent personal insults with delberate misuse of names as racist. This, unfortunately, reflects on you more than anything else. It all begins with self-respect and there're thousands of enlightened people reading this forum so do yourself a service. LOL


Anne, I've been a patient man on these threads. In fact, most here will agree that I've been MORE than patient, to the point of having them question why we are not "moderating". I've tried my best to give you as much leeway as possible, but once you raise the racism element, my spidey sense starts twitching overtime. I don't like it when that happens. You comments above are so damned preposterous that I almost drowned my keyboard in Pu Er tea. The only royal "we" you have is if you happen to have a mouse in your pocket. The fact that our posters take liberties with your nick and you take it as an insult, well, I've got news for you. DO YOURSELF A SERVICE. You are welcome to leave the forum anytime you desire. We do not force you to stay here, in fact, most have asked me to ban you a long long time ago. My reason for continuing to let you stay is selfish in as much as I enjoy watching you and several other act like little children in the schoolyard playing silly word games. Each trying to playing oneupmanship. At this point it doesn't matter one iota WHO started it as each is doing their best to outdo the other without resorting to foul language or racism. UNTIL NOW. The writing is on the wall.

tic...toc...tic...toc...

moderator

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:24 am

tyianchang wrote:But the fact is, children do not contribute towards their parents' retirement income in the west. Or in SG where there's CPF.



May I suggest that firstly you need to consider that in the west, talking about money, or giving money away to relatives (excluding young children) is not going to be something that the recipient is likely to be proud of. To an extent it would signify that they have personally failed in having provided adequately for themselves, and so would be a thing carrying shame.

Secondly I think you need to consider that in the west there are ways of supporting your family without it involving handing over a wad of banknotes each month. Such as paying for trips or holidays for your parents, loaning a sibling money for a new venture and so on. It is also quite common for children to have to fund or part-fund retirement or nursing homes for their parents, and it can be a long-term and severe burden.

Thirdly I think you need to consider that taxes are generally far higher in the west than in say Singapore. Consider it a form of advanced 'social piety', and what you are paying now in taxes supports your parents and others' benefits.

You will see none of these examples involve giving away banknotes, but in many cases it is making a contribution in lieu of banknotes, that the recipient would otherwise had to have made out of their own cash. It is helping out a relative whilst allowing them to keep their dignity.

Finally your comment about there being no FP in Singapore is patently ridiculous. Did you not see EV-D's thoughful post earlier today about what it means to him? Or KSL's long pieces on what it means to him?

Furthermore my SGn Malay wife and her siblings give money to their parents each month. The parents have minimal outgoings, the father is retired and on a significant pension (significant as in I believe it accumulated over 40 years or so), but he also still works too to 'keep himself busy'. Who would have thought it eh, not even Chinese Chinese, not even SGn Chinese, and yet they are practicing FP in it's truest sense of giving where there is no compulsion or need.

And you're accusing others of being racist, again? ... [sigh]

p.s. I haven't the time to describe the FP of the Indians in the UK that I know (including relatives), but maybe another time, the hole you're in is probably deep enough for today...
Last edited by JR8 on Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:39 am

That is well explained JR8! and actually Indian culture is almost the same as Chinese, when it comes to FP hierarchy and responsibilities if i'm not wrong. Brits from my time were raised by quite strict parents I believe and respect for elders was very common, many lived and still live with their parents rather than live independently, because of bonding and love for their elders. I can recall my mum refusing to come and live with us, as her home was much more important to her, she battled on from 1907 to 1995 god bless her and a very proud woman, that worked all her life, she had friends that cared as well as family.

Now here's an opportunist from the CPPCC the claims look all to familiar, looks like the Chinese privileged are getting more American :lol: http://www.chinahush.com/2011/01/02/rej ... pensation/

earthfriendly
Manager
Manager
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sat, 20 Aug 2005

Postby earthfriendly » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 1:21 am

A Hong Kong classmate lived with her American host mother, an elderly lady living alone who would confide in her that she missed her kids and wished they would come visit her. But she would not say that directly to her own kids. It was puzzling to the HK girl. All part of the family and yet she cannot convey her inner needs to those dearest to her?

Sometimes, one just need to understand the cultural constraint of another. Is it necessary for HK girl to force host mother to see FP from a Chinese point of view? Of course she can explain if her host mother wants to learn more. Each culture has its own uniqueness not found in others. Forcing another person to be understanding, compassionate and insistent that they understand our way of life, isn't that itself being forceful?

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 1:44 am

earthfriendly wrote:A Hong Kong classmate lived with her American host mother, an elderly lady living alone who would confide in her that she missed her kids and wished they would come visit her. But she would not say that directly to her own kids. It was puzzling to the HK girl. All part of the family and yet she cannot convey her inner needs to those dearest to her?

Sometimes, one just need to understand the cultural constraint of another. Is it necessary for HK girl to force host mother to see FP from a Chinese point of view? Of course she can explain if her host mother wants to learn more. Each culture has its own uniqueness not found in others. Forcing another person to be understanding, compassionate and insistent that they understand our way of life, isn't that itself being forceful?


Agreed, which is why the official asking for more money is more of a comedian with bad timing, thinking NZ should bend too his wishes. I mean I thought it was some sort of prank to be honest, though culture and death is also very complicated in families and especially so in Chinese, when the bread winner passes.

The Chinese official was well out of order, he should have known better, than to make a bizarre insensitive request, that couldn't be taken seriously. It is up to his own government to provide for them, under the one child policy, that is basic commonsense. He's probably already regretting his own words!

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 2:05 am

ksl wrote:Agreed, which is why the official asking for more money is more of a comedian with bad timing, thinking NZ should bend too his wishes. I mean I thought it was some sort of prank to be honest, though culture and death is also very complicated in families and especially so in Chinese, when the bread winner passes.

The Chinese official was well out of order, he should have known better, than to make a bizarre insensitive request, that couldn't be taken seriously. It is up to his own government to provide for them, under the one child policy, that is basic commonsense. He's probably already regretting his own words!



From a newspaper article linked by K1W1 a few days ago...

'Cheng Lei, co-ordinator of the Chinese embassy's disaster relief centre, told Radio New Zealand that the one-child policy meant the victims' families had lost their source of economic assistance for retirement. He called on the New Zealand Government to increase the ACC compensation available to them.
...
He said there had been no formal approach from the Chinese Government for more money for those families. Chinese embassy official Wang Xin said Mr Cheng had been relaying the desire of the families rather than an official request.

The Chinese embassy was working closely with New Zealand government agencies involved in the relief efforts and would continue to do so, Mr Wang said. "It's a tragedy not only to New Zealanders but to Chinese families ... in China most of them are only one child.

"We believe, with the best good wishes of the New Zealand Government, that we can resolve our issues relating to the Chinese victims in a very sound and smooth way." That would include a "legitimate, reasonable compensation and other financial assistance".'

------

Strange isn't it, you seem to move from a denial that Lei's positioning (that merited a response from the NZ PM no less) was not Chinese government policy, but then you have another Chinese government employee Xin reiterating that their needs are somehow different. So it is not one loose-screw here...

I agree, I see nothing to make the nationalities of the victims different. If there is a case to be brought due to mandated local custom (one child) in China then surely any case rests locally in China? It seems bizarre that the Chinese government would suggest via diplomatic channels that NZ must pay additional compo for it's nationals due to China's own internal policies.

Ho hum.

User avatar
k1w1
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon, 30 May 2005

Postby k1w1 » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 4:24 am

Tyianchang, your post was offensive and insulting, on a myriad of levels. You really make a complete joke out of yourself calling anyone to task over their statements when you make deliberately inflammatory posts like that.

tyianchang wrote:This isuue had been thrashed out upteen times but really, I am sorry if your feeling of being slighted has gripped you so deeply.

What are you talking about? Where did I say I felt slighted - about FP or anything else? I said I was annoyed that the issue was being glossed over and these discussions too often turn into a black and white, "them vs us" argument, which it has...

tyianchang wrote:1. It is true that FP as in the Confucian sense and a cotinuous practice among most Chinese, but not all, is 'unheard of' among the average person in the west. That this is fact, is gleaned from schools and among the public and supported by the infrastructure in western countries where pensions and other forms of social security provide the aged ( though this is being undermined more and more so) and retireds with regular incomes and other benefits such as socail welfare and NHS ( some ameneded to being opened to privatisation currently). You might feel slighted for no rhyme or reason other than having some false sense of superiorty. But the fact is, children do not contribute towards their parents' retirement income in the west. Or in SG where there's CPF.


How many people have you sampled to come to the conclusion that Filial Peity, as practiced by Chinese, is unheard of in the West? You are claiming to have "gleaned" this from the public and from some school system. Where is that, exactly? Good grief... And again, with the accusation that I feel slighted. Based on what - and how would you know anyway?

I do not appreciate you claiming I have a false sense of superiority. Over whom do you think I have this feeling? Just you, or all of China? (Please, who is the one behaving like they are slighted here? :roll: ) What a ridiculous idea that is, and the fact that you resorted to such a personal and baseless insult says more about you than it does about me. To use your words and all.

tyianchang wrote:When in time of needs, some parents might not get anything from tehir children; though that rests on individual cases. It's a shame that unacceptably harsh words are constantly used to debase the Chinese community everywhere by some of you either explicitly or by implications.


It's true some children do not take care of their elderly or needy parents. Every country has terrible cases of this. Are you suggesting this does not happen in Chinese culture?

I must say there is real irony in the fact that you take extreme offense to anything you perceive as an insult to China, but have no problem whatsoever in insulting all Western countries with debasing statements and derogatory comments (about people's behavior towards their parents etc) without even thinking about how others on the forum may perceive these statements.

You want to draw lines between Chinese Singaporeans and Chinese from China, but you apparently do not know that "Western countries" are not the same place. Very ironic show of ignorance really.

tyianchang wrote:2. I have thought over the news in your link and these are my concerns.
a. It's not right for any groups to ASK (not demand) for more to be given than others. I can accept your expression of 'disgust' ( even though, the context of parents' losing their children's lives make it rather incredulous)((to someone with human sensitivities;)) but obviously empathies need to transcend identification with race for some, if not many.


So now you insinuate I don't even have human sensitivities? Oh well, isn't that just delightful?

I have already said in an earlier post that losing a child is a tragic and horrific ordeal. I feel very badly for these parents, as a mother myself, and I cannot begin to comprehend their grief - I sincerely hope none of us ever has to experience that. A parent's love for their child transcends all languages, culture, religions or whatever other differences people may have. Certainly anyone who is a parent themselves knows that what these poor people are going through must be worse than any kind of hell.

What I found disgusting was the suggestion that these parents had lost more than other parents and should be compensated more for it. I find it an outrageous suggestion that some people are more "valuable" (for want of a better word) than others. You may not be aware of this, but it is a huge part of New Zealand culture to hold egalitarian values. I'm not going to be naive and say this happens all the time or that you will never find snobs or jerks in New Zealand, but egalitarianism is a very important concept to New Zealanders. Perhaps it may be as important as the traditional concept of filial peity clearly is to you. For this reason, people here have taken *huge* offense at Chinese parents are asking for more money than other parents.

Their story is tragic, but so is the story of Jayden Andrews-Howland, also an only child, tragically killed when his bus was hit by falling masonry. Who is anyone to suggest his mother has not lost as much as other mothers?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christc ... ws-Howland

Then there is the story of the young woman, who only just became a mother, whose baby was killed by falling furniture. Is her child not as important as others?

Every one of these stories are awful, but I cannot accept that one person's child is a greater loss to their parents than another.

tyianchang wrote:
b. The quoted speech from Mr Lei does not seem fit in the whole context -and I would like to make further enqueries with the Chinese embassy about this. I'd send a photocopy and ask for verification and explanation in the light of your complaint.
c. From my own expereince with the Chinese, they would not ask for anything. For the embassy to ask for more than the others, it's new to me. And I want to know the truth. Currently, my suspicions are
1. the spokesman might be corrupted
2. there's a new assertiveness regarding material reimbursements
3. the Chinese govt might not know the details or the spokeman acted for the family rather than the country.

As a general rule, I don't believe until proven.
Your argument here is only connected to my op by implication. FP is only possible in the consideration of the treament of children towards their parents; and not even Confucius can decree how children should treat their parents. For you to use the op as a political tool in this context certainly lacks parity; FP comes from bottom up and not top down, except in cases of what goes round comes round.



It may surprise you to hear that I did think about these points as well. Yes, the embassy official who claimed to speak for the parents may well be corrupted. Yes, this could all be nonsense and blown out of proportion by the journalist. However, when a story is printed in international media, and the official is named and directly quoted, would this not be a sure lawsuit and not worth the selling of a few extra papers? There has been no retraction, no apology, no statement of clarification. There has been wide spread outrage though.

New Zealand is a tiny country at the bottom of the world. It bows down to relative super powers like China, going to (sometimes ludicrous) lengths to secure trade deals and bring foreign students in. That was clear in the thinly-veiled threat from the Chinese embassy spokesman when he suggested Chinese students may consider not coming to New Zealand in the future, should New Zealand not consider offering better compensation... If anything, this story would have been down-played as a political move.

tyianchang wrote:
It's necessary to find out if the Chinese govt considers FP as an additional payment when students or foreign nationals lost their lives in any eathquakes in China. Which would be FAIR enough then.


Again, I agree with this and wondered it myself. So I looked it up.

According to media reports, when children were killed in their school building by the earthquake in Sichuan just two years ago, their devastated parents were apparently *arrested* for asking for answers from the Chinese government about the state of their school building:

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18184

The parents were even told by the government they could not hold memorial services for their children:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... rials.html

tyianchang wrote:Lastly, I'm not Annie and we recognise persistent personal insults with delberate misuse of names as racist. This, unfortunately, reflects on you more than anything else. It all begins with self-respect and there're thousands of enlightened people reading this forum so do yourself a service. LOL


Thousands of enlightened people read this forum? :lol: Well. I don't have any access to data that may dispute this claim, but I would find it surprising.

I apologise for the incorrect spelling of your nick. It was not my intention to be disrespectful. Had I known an accidental additional letter would cause such turmoil and grief, I would have been much more careful. I apologise if this error has incorrectly caused you to believe me a racist. I also unreservedly apologise for any offense this may have caused your family, your country, and to any of the readers who may be of Chinese origin or have Chinese family members. It was an innocent error and certainly not intended as a racist retort. I have noticed that I also mis-spelled "Asian" in that same post. I will amend that at the same time, in the hopes that our many avid followers will see that I am nothing close to a racist ignoramus in desperate need of self respect...

:roll:

Sheesh. What a start to the day! I need a coffee now.

Multiple edits for grammar and spelling glitches...

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 5:34 am

Damn if that's the damage you can lay waste before a coffee, I'm nervous to think what you can do after one :wink:

User avatar
x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9301
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Location: Singapore

Postby x9200 » Thu, 17 Mar 2011 8:38 am

ksl wrote:One can only blame the system we live in

This is always the case. ALWAYS. You can blame somebody else for any mischief or crime as we are to large extent made not self-created. Parents, society, evolution you name it. So where should we place the borderline?
Same goes for the information people use to judge. You never absolutely know is it truthful or not. Does not need to be a newspaper. Keeping silent just not to hurt someone in the rare case of being misinformed typically does much more harm than rising your voice.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
  • The tips thing, revisited
    by Brah » Sat, 17 May 2014 10:59 pm » in Staying, Living in Singapore
    47
    7619
    by zzm9980 View the latest post
    Sun, 08 Jun 2014 3:24 am

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest