Dear Yabby,

I didn't mean to infer that you knew
nothing about America. Only that
our experiences differed.

Yes, I did back Hilary.

And I congratulate you Yabs, on your
choice.

Barack Obama is a great candidate.
I simply thought the majority of Americans
weren't ready yet, to have a black man as
their President.

Perhaps they now are.

We'll see.

It will be a close race,
as it was with John Kennedy and
Richard Nixon. That's what makes
American politics so interesting.
"It ain't over till ..."

Foxy

I was absolutely gobsmacked to read your comments on this thread: on other subjects you strive to be balanced or at least to admit that you have - like all of us - a lot to learn and may need to do some further research. Yet on this thread, while allowing that you and Yabby have different ideas, you come across as some sort of authority and firmly reject an alternative view.

You correctly give the population as 1.3billion - then claim only the "elite" benefit leaving "billions" to suffer etc..."as they have always done". This logically means .3 of the population only has any quality of life, does it not? For the rest (I'll ignore the pluralisation of the word billion as a typing error)its all suffering as usual?

C'mon girl, common sense would tell you that with all the advances in education, medicine, women's position, wages, living conditions etc. this statement cannot possibly be true. There have been articles, personal accounts, experiences and posts recounted even here on OLO which give a broader picture. Haven't you even read, or taken on board, a single one of them? How could you describe a population which is now the worlds second largest consumer of luxury goods as being the same (I'm referring to the "as usual" tag) as one who, twenty years ago, didn't have enough to eat, lived in squalour, had no quality of life....or do you think its only that .3 percent who is benefitting? They'd have to be not just elite but mega-rich to account for all that consumerism!

Propaganda is a tool of media everywhere and your post, unlike Yabby's, seems to suggest that you have been sucked in good and proper. As I said, I'm gobsmacked. You are usually so much better than that.

Dear Romany,

Me an authority on China?

Not true.

I apologise if that's the way
I came across.

I haven't been influenced by the "media spin"
on China as you infer.

What I have been influenced by,
have been news reports from journalists in Beijing,
and accounts of what they saw and experienced.

Have you read the book, "Bitter Winds," by Harry Wu
and Carolyn Wakeman? Perhaps you should.

You may then understand where I'm coming from.

As for your being gobsmacked over my take on this.
That's unfortunate for me. Because at no time did I
denigrate anything Yabby said. At least I didn't
mean to.
I merely did not share his opinion.
However,I did say, I respected it.

If, disagreeing with someone means
I'm not being being "balanced,"
in my point of view.
I guess that's something
I'll have to live with.

Foxy - "If, disagreeing with someone means I'm not being being "balanced," in my point of view..." No, of course your disagreement with Yabby's words have nothing to do with balance - I was in fact referring to your own post. Your response to him was as the rational adult we all know you to be so it never entered my head (nor, I'm pretty sure, anyone else's) that by disagreeing with him you would be denigrating him.

And the reason I was gobsmacked (very surprised) was exactly as I stated (though obviously I didn't make it clear): - there has been quite a bit of talk from ordinary folk even here on OLO over the last few months detailing changes, misconceptions, progress etc. which give food for (alternative) thought. While journalists - often sent on a brief mission to help sell papers and earn their salary - can often misrepresent things.

So my surprise was that you were less willing to consider what people who have no axe to grind say than those to whom sensationalism and agenda are tools of the trade. And the reason I was surprised is, I would have thought, rather complimentary than otherwise? Had you been one of those people who set their ideas in stone according to prevailing opinion I would not have batted an eyelid.

The quote you gave was from an American paper and, even though CNN, Fox and other outlets did apologise for the way in which they misreported the Llahsa incident it is still referred to it as though the doctored photos and actual furphies never happened. That's why I spoke about being influenced by the propaganda of media.

I'm not a Sinophile but I do strongly believe that two sides of any story - whether it be concerning the war in Iraq, women's positions in the world, capital punishment or life in modern China - should be given equal attention.

Every post I've read of yours has led me to believe you felt the same way.

Dear Romany,

I'd like to think that my perceptions
are not set in stone.

As I've written in other posts, I'm constantly
learning, and hopefully will continue to do
so until the day I die.

However, in the case of China, I'll keep a watch
on future developments, and let you know what I
think further down the track. (If we're still
communicating in cyberspace at the time).

I will be honest with you, and admit that perhaps
my view in this case is being influenced greatly because
of what my family suffered under the totalitarian
Soviet regime, from which they ran during WWII.

Anyway, Thanks for caring enough Romany
about what I think.

I've taken what you've said on board.

Take care,