The article by Stern was interesting because it went over what an environmental lawsuit case looks like. An environmentalist lawyer stated that it is hard to win an environmental lawsuit in China. However, they are not lost causes and they sometime help litigations move forward. This article says that this shows how the courts are uneven, however, I think it more shows the point mentioned in the Pollution and Protest article in China and  one of the points made is that it could be a real health hazard and the Chinese might not protest the environmental issue. This  is a pretty crazy idea to me, most environmental issues that impacts humans and animals health wise are protested and heavily publicized at all costs if possible. This article also uses a word that I have found pretty much describes China and that is “complex”. For starters the political and social context under which the protest takes place is specific and then if only environmental damage is being done then there is not going to be  a  protest done about  it, there has to be a perceived very serious potential threat. The strategy best used for environmental protests  is to piggyback off protests  regarding more politcally favorable  issues. Although this  is an important issue I have to agree that this seems like a smart idea because even in the U.S. I think environmental protests only reaches a certain audience that pays attention. If you were to piggyback of something always in the  news it would spread a lot better guaranteed.

The argument in Authoritarian Environmentalism Undermined? Basically made points to counter those that say authoritarian government is going to be the only method able to effectively address the environmental issue. The main argument to this is that the cadre rotation has a generally negative and unintended consequences. The high cadre turn over rate affects cadre’s incentive and implementation capacities. They need to be able to report accomplishments regularly to their superiors, so they are more likely to choose a policy that is cheap and quick. Also, they prefer something that is short-term highly visible and yield an outcome that can be measured  within their tenure period. Although constantly moving cadre around can allow for new ideas and resources it also could have opposite effect and cadre member could lack the  knowledge and networks essential for drawing local business into greener growth initiatives. In 2006  the central government made it required for government officials to serve their 5 year term at least before being rotated, however it is not clear how close this is being followed and how effective this is. Analysis done in this essay suggested that short time horizon is what put local leaders under pressure to “politically achieve” in a few short years.

The article, “Governing Environmental Conflicts in China…” pairs the above article perfectly. It establishes that laws and policies are drafted in Beijing, but implemented in the local government and this is what local governments are able to change the environmental laws a lot. This article explains in more detail the reasons for  local leaders changing their decisions in governing environmental conflicts. It attributes it to 4 main reasons: 1. the scale of the protest, 2. the form of the protests, more particularly the occurence of violence, 3. the position of the national government, and 4. the costs of meeting demands of the citizens. The bigger the  protest and the more people that there are the more likely the local leader will go with whatever all the citizens want, if violence is present at a protest that  is associated with instability  and the leader will be more likely to change the policy for what  the violent party wants, the position of the national government matters because doing what goes against the national government is a good way to not get re-elected and to get  in trouble by he CCP, and lastly the cost of meeting the demands of  the citizen, if  it is affordable , then maybe the local leader would be more likely to change  the policy. Interesting enough, majority of all the studies have been done by  a Western Democracy and suggest that a win win approach is best. Many local leaders are compromising, or completely abandoning he national governments plans.

The general basis of both these article  is as a local leader with a shirt turn over rate you are going to do whatever you can to make yourself  seem most impressive for your next position to hopefully get a promotion.

favor, China is one of the world’s largest energy users and emitters, however, it also has the largest market for clean tech.  enterprise. I do not know having the largest market for trying to clean up the problem it is creating is necessarily a huge accomplishment, but a lot of countries, including the U.S. could probably follow in their foot steps with clean energy. The Paris commitments china made are kind of B.S. it does not push China to make any real strides to improving their green house gases problem. It seems like something that was just done to look and sound good, but has no real meaning at all. The fact that china announced it will increase its coal usage by 20% and yet they will still be within the Paris agreement limits is proof of this. I completely agree with what was said in the China’s Great Leap Forward Podcast, China  is extremely complex and is not something that you can easily just break down because there never is a simple answer. For example since China doesn’t have its energy needs met and China needs energy, it is kind of hard to argue ,economically, that they shouldn’t use the cheapest option right now, which is coal. However, environmentally you can one hundred percent say China you are dumb for using coal. What  is interesting is in response to Trump China acknowledged that global warming is real and a serious problem and they acknowledge that they need to lower emissions, but yet they are doing everything the exact opposite in order to do this. And I think that being the leader in clean air technology proves that they have the technology and resources to do it if  they really wanted to.

The article by Mark Unsurprisingly brings up a really interesting discussion question, can democracy be sustained in any region with the current environmental challenge taking place?I never thought of our government ideologies as a key or harmful the the environmental crisis issue, but it is a good argument. “‘Humanity will have to trade its liberty to live as it wishes in favor of a system where survival is paramount’ ( Shearman and Smith 2007, p. 4)” I believe this argument is valid because in a authoritarian regime they can just band all behaviour that is counter productive to saving the environment and humanities survival. The article is right when it says that it is a concept hard to accept coming from a democracy where freedom and choice and are one of the most important things to us. I know China has done a  lot to try and  help with the environmental problem, but just like the U.S. it is still not enough. I know this article has potential to be true to a certain extent, I feel pretty certain I can say people are going to have to give up something that value in order to hep combat the environmental issues.

I feel like religion is another one of those things where what Xi Jinping says versus what the CCP does is not the same. Xi Jinping claims that religion and the state are independent and as long as it follows the rules of the CCP it is fine to practice religion, but I don’t think this is really the case. It seems the CCP has been tightening the policies on religion once again. In the past, during the Cultural Revolution, the government tried to eliminate religion, When the Era  of reform took place in 1979, there was a relaxation of religious policies and the government got way more religious varieties then the bargained for. The new found emphasis on nationalism is what caused the tightening of religion. Because Christianity and Islam is not a part of the Chinese heritage they believe it  needs to be tightly controlled. The interesting aspect of this, is that Christianity is increasing in popularity. Richard Madsen uses the metaphor of an emperor to trying to guide a flood as a metaphor. With 70 million Christians in China today they might surpass how man Christians are in the U.S., but I feel like this could be attributed to the U.S. being a melting pot of ethnicity, more so then China is anyways. Besides that fact the confucianism is associated with the Chinese heritage and Christianity is not, I think the real problem is the fact that Christianity is globally recognized and makes you apart of a community that could dilute the feelings of allegiance to the CCP. The funny part is most christians want to help China and are not opposed to the Chinese government, however, they often get in trouble for doing anything that makes China better if  it goes against the CCP. Also, they are always being suspected of being up to no good that is why they do not like too many working in the government. Even though Xi Jinping is trying to get everyone on the same page and really unify the religious aspect o China many people  claim to be atheist that work in the party, but in reality they will have a religious preference it is just easier to say you do not have one. In the U.S. even though we claim we do not  have a national religion associated with the government I find this is only partially true. For starters if you are not Christian or Catholic you are pretty much a  “outlier”. In addition, I do not foresee like a Muslim being elected President of t he U.S. anytime soon, because people would not consider a Muslim a representation of the United States.

The podcast interviewing Justin Jacobs on the Modern Chinese State was interesting it was a little hard to follow at times, just because I am one of those people that is visual and needs like the names and stuff on paper in front of me. Anyhow, this podcast made a point that I am the starting to realize is very important, things in central China versus the outer provinces of China are very different. While the CCP might  be trying to unify China, they do not like to agcknoweldge the differences, they do not like to acknowledge past mistakes and they try and  avoid a lot of foreign conflicts and I think Jacobs makes a good point that, History is like a mirror it hints to present day actions. I feel like a lot of this comes from avoiding and not acknowledging past conflicts. A concept that was interesting was how when China worked with the Soviets even though they disagreed with them they has 5 years of autonomy that has never been replicated and that both China and the Soviets were very tolerant. He said you should work with this that publicly criticize you, because you can use that in the future. Although, I could see how this could be true it seems like it could also make  for a lot of tension. However, just thinking about it, if I had to work with someone that I did not really like, although it might be awkward I would probably be extremely polite and cooperative this just being because you wouldn’t to step on each other toes. I could also  see how this could be a very dangerous situation, because if someone said something that rubbed me the wrong way I would  feel more obligated to react because I already do not really like this person as is.

When reading the From Empire to Nation, or Why Taiwan, Tibet, and Xinjiang Will not be Given Independence” it was the first time that is dawned on me that China has  minorities. This is just me being ignorant to Chinese culture, but I guess i just assumed that Chinese people were all just Chinese people and they did not discriminate and divide amongst themselves, but clearly this is not the case. The story of  the Han vs. Non- Han people is  the same story as most other nations where  native population is oppressed. The difference between this story and many others is, the Han were able to take back control and now  oppress the Non-Han people; they did not even like to acknowledge their existence at first. This  hatred was incorporated into their history, and the modern nations culture. When nationalism took place the  foundation was built on the Han culture and this continued to be true when the CCP was formed their backbone was the Han people. The CCP drew its inspiration from the the Soviets theory on nationhood and the Republican ethnological research. The CCP created a nation that was centered on the ethnically undivided Han. The fifty-five other minorities were to understand that they are tolerated as remnants of  the past, but would not be tolerated in the future of the modern China. Obviously, this caused a lot  of discontent and was matched with a lot of opposition especially to the minority policies. Eventually China started to unify its society and nation. They used the Anti-Japanese War help instill a feeling of belonging and unification. It is very funny to me that violence and wars so often bring a  nation together, I understand you are all fighting for  one cause, but it is just the opposite environment of what you are trying to produce. The real key short term was a better funded central state to produce unity. This money was used to improve China and start a lot of government projects. In the long run the most effective for unification was that children were all growing up learning and speaking the national language of mandarin opposed to their local dialect, commercialization of mass media, mobile phones, internet, social media, transportation became affordable, and the growth market economy created an integrated society. As China started to become more ethnically diverse, problems started to arise from this like the riots in 2009 with the Uighur. These riots increased a already tense situation, and the anti-Han feeling amongst the Uighur increased. As the economic opportunity increased in China this increased the number of foreign immigrants, which furthered the ethnic diversity dimension in China. The Chinese started to outgrow many  of their minority policies. Many people in China believed that Chinese were no longer at a disadvantage, this was especially true with Education. It is pretty funny because this  problem that we deal with in the U.S. today,  a lot of people do not think we need our minority laws anymore, like affirmative action in education. The policies try to separate religion and culture, but religion is a major divider. I find it it very interesting that the CCP wants to keep these things separate, but then declares Confucianism as the national heritage. The CCP tries to avoid problems by not recognizing it as a religion, but as a heritage. This seems like just the kind of loop hole the CCP would use to be hypocritical against their own policies.

Hastings article on the Uyghur, was very confusing for me. But what really caught my attention is how the CCP calls this minority group terrorists and compares them to Al-Qaeda. After 9/11, when the U.S. declares the war on terror China also declares a year war against fighting terror. My original thoughts is that this minority group of people are not terrorists and the CCP is only saying this because they are separatist and do not align with the party goals. However, I am unsure if I am biased or not for not wanting to side with the CCP, or if it is true the CCP and government are exaggerating the extent and causes of these attacks. Nonetheless, these bombing and attacks taking place in Xinjiang do appear to be acts of terror. Although the Uyghur might be justified for there reasons  it is not right of  them to bomb innocent people in China to make up for the history of oppression from separatist Chinese ethnic groups. It seems like  it might benefit China to recognize Xinjiang asa part of  the different government. It might  release a lot of the tension and political unrest amongst the Uyghur and everyone else. It also seems the Chinese government could  be provoking  these attacks  in a lot  of different ways not saying that is right for them to attacks to happen, but sometimes it is very important to look at the roots of these problems. Also, the Chinese government will blame  the Uyghur without eve knowing they are the cause of the attacks, which increases the severity of the problem with these people. In America after the 9/11 attacks we have developed an increased sensitivity to all Muslims and many people associate all Muslims with terrorists, but in reality this is not true. Because of this many  people have developed a very radical point of view and think we should ban all Muslims from the U.S., or should ban the  religion, or whatever. I know it not the exact same thing, but I can understand the tension and events taking place to a certain extent.

I think what I found most interesting about this speech was the discussion about the linguistic challenges. In the United States we only speak English and there are no separate dialects, Sue there are southern accents, New Jersey accents, and etc., but for the most part if you speak english in the United States anyone will be able to understand you just fine. This is not the case in China, I have been lead to believe up until taking this class that Mandarin was main dialect  in China and that pretty much anyone will be able to understand you if you are speaking Mandarin, but this is also false. Over half the population has there own local dialect, and in most cases it  is completely different. He bought up the story with food, how he was forced to call his favorite food by a different name and that numbed the memories he had because he didn’t associate the memories he had by the new name. Besides for making it difficult to understand, it seems the  communication barrier would make every city seem separate as if  it were its own country. I would question whether it  is possible to be truly unified without all being able to understand each other, or speaking the same dialect. Another really good point about  language is just simple translations are not always effective. Dr. Gengsong Gao brought up the word democracy, to us democracy represent freedom, choice, liberty, and all the other principles America prides themselves on. On the other hand, he mentions a local dialect where  democracy means the opposite of what it means to Americans. So, when in China and globally, when people discuss how China should become a democratic country they are highly opposed to this, but it is not  because they oppose democracy they oppose the concepts the word means to them. This leads me to believe that the CCP perhaps has the right idea to making the national language Mandarin and leaning towards that is the language that should be taught in all school in China. On the other hand, it  seems like that is to oppressive . I try and put my shoes of someone who lives in a small village with  our own local dialect and I  know I would not want  the government  telling me I am banned from speaking my language ( not saying this is hat they do); it seems that there probably would  be no reason for me to learn Mandarin because everyone I know and need to associate with understands me.

One major question I have about this is, lets say I speak Mandarin and I call a business that has there own local dialect, would they even really be able to understand me, or is this a barrier that makes a daily interaction difficult?

The article by Yue Zhang, states “that contemporary Chinese artist have long been marginalized in China as their ideas conflict with mainstream political ideology.” I  would 100% agree that this is true I got a really good glimpse/ understanding of this in the Ai Weiwei Documentary. It was mentioned in the end of this article, but It was extremely interesting how they stated that Ai Weiwei was an exception to most artists these days because he was not only an artist but an political activist as well, so the government finds it safer  to just imprison him because they cannot control him. It seems that no matter what the CCP always finds a way to take control of every situation that could turn into a revolution in China. Like how did  the government/ CCP manage to turn the supposed to be underground art villages into officially recognized Art Villages. By districting the art they were able to control it. Yes, in comparison to the Soviets the Chinese had more freedom, however, they still lack a lot of freedom that they would have in a non-communist country. It seems like the government  having complete controll over the Factory and Songzhuang takes away from the fascination of the art villages a lot. Especially considering  the government has control of everything that is displayed in these towns. I feel that if i was an artist I would not want to live in these towns fro the jacked up prices and extreme monitoring of my art work. It was interesting that   the “one team, two titles” came up again in this article because it just proves that anything the CCP/government is not supposed to be involved with they always end up the leader of it, by a member of the CCP running the outside organization. By creating an art school and making artist teachers they too then became controlled by the CCP, they stopped making politically aimed work and their  styles changed. The one positive thing for them was they became famous and gained recognition in a way they never would be able to in China otherwise. This brings up the interesting question of globalizations effect on the Art Industry in China and I think the answer is pretty simple. Globalization has allowed Chinese artists to become known internationally, however in China it is still veery hard to be recognized. All in all, artwork is less of a threat to communism today then it was before, but this could be because the government can highly monitor the art industry.

In education the government/CCP is asking the same questions as with art, how can you prevent this potentially very dangerous group from revolting. In this article it is stated that University students are said to be the “‘repositories of the ideals of their nation’ and college campuses are said to be ‘the central stage for the drama of democracy’s ebb and flow'” Essentially what I get from this is college student pose the biggest threat to the CCP and I think this can be seen as true with how Mao tries to take the CCP the college campuses to get students mobilizing is campaign and able to report back to the CCP before there is any kind of uprising. Post Deng-era the control has become very de-politicized, bureaucratic and pragmatic. They uses materialistic things as incentives of cooperation, for example, a career, if you want a good career in the future it would be advised you follow and aid in the following of the rules and regulations set out by the CCP. The top goal for the CCP in the 21st century is to craft and maintain stability. This sounds bad, but I am hoping for the exact opposite, I hope the students are looking to make changes and are tired of their government. I think that all of the outcomes for the political cynicism in universities is possible. I hope the party-sate does lose a legitimacy and I hope the Chinese do start using alternate methods to protest the government. the only thing I do not think would be beneficial would be for the eruption in a devastating matter seems like that could result in a civil war of some sort.

I think dreaming in Chinese was a very good read; it was entertaining and I learned  a lot about the country and language through the authors experiences. The way the Fallows describes it language is  telescope to the country, which I think turns out to be very true.

1. The Grammar of Romance

I never realized that love had a compatibility between cultures I always just thought love was love and that was a universal emotion, but this is not true. In English love does have different tenses so to foreigners I guess that could imply that love is a time limited thing, however, it is more just a default of the English language. In Chinese however, love has no tense and is viewed as like a being, situation, or circumstance and is a form of existence. Fallows describes that there are 3 versions of love in China the political love, the love-love, and the arranged marriage kind of low. The hold hand and cuddle in the park kind of love is forming with the new generation. It is interesting that the change in tenses can cause a barrier that is so misunderstanding. Like when she says she loves her husband for now, and the author cant figure out if she is just being cold hearted, trying to specify that she is in love with her husband, or trying to clarify for the American sake because we have so many tenses of the word love. It seems that love just really does not mean the same things to the two cultures though, because they ask her which kid she loves more, which in America you would never ask a question like that.

2. When Rude is Polite

In china people are naturally rude without meaning to be it is just  the natural etiquette of the streets. I think this is fascinating, because in California you often will hear complaints about Chinese always being rude, using a harsh town, or their abruptness as impatience/rudeness, but in reality this is just a part of their culture. I understand how they could take saying please and thank you as a formality, but it seems like someone is not a true extension of yourself no matter who they are and so therefor manners should be required. It is pretty weird that doubling the word can soften the impact; in English this usually has the exact opposite effect.

3. Language Play as a National Sport

The concept of Chao Yuen Ren’s poem is hilarious, but is mind blowing you can have 96 characters that do not have the same meaning, but can all be pronounced the same. I do not mean to be judgmental, but it seems like the 400 syllabus only policy is not a very good one. you know the system is not a very good one because you often have to clarify which syllabus you are using since they have double meanings, and such. I do not think that I could learn all the different syllabals and their meanings, They would all start to blend together to me I think especially if they end up being homophones and are said the same.

4. Why the Chinese Hear Tones

It is crazy how much different the tones are emphasized. In Chinese when you use the wrong tone it could be  completely different word, which I think is very crazy. The tone is a dead giveaway if someone is a foreigner. In English tone just changes a statement to a question, or adds emphasis. This is something that Chinese struggle with learning English and something English people struggle with learning Chinese. I am pretty sure I would have a lot of trouble with this especially since barely any of the tricks they try and come up with seem to work. They just say Chinese are born to  hear tones so it something that comes easy for them.

5.China’s Ordinary Joe

The laobaixing is the ordinary person in China this is a word that is commonly used so the author was curious what people felt that  the word meant exactly. The interesting thing was depending on who you asked yo got a slightly different answer on what groups are included to be considered laobaixings. In general though it seems to be a ordinary person that is not a high ranking official, is not famous, and most likely not rich. One thing they did all agree on was that the author was not a laobaixing. This word was used in dynastic time to compare those that have the power to rule vs. those that do not. During the cultural revolution Mao used the word to refer to his political insiders. People used to use the word “tungzhi”which means comrade, but now the word means gay or die  hard communist. Perhaps the most interesting part of this was how she describes the common people are not concerned about freedom of speech and uncensored internet as we Westerners are . According to the government and the brain washed Chinese all they need are toilets that flush refrigerators, color TVs, and mobile phones. I was talking to my grandmother who went on a retreat in China and she was saying how they are all brain washed and it is often hard to discuss political things such as them wanting freedom of speech because it is not something they have been told they should wan  basically. The  end of the chapter describes how the village receives this washer machine, which was the dream of the village.

6. A Brief Introduction to Chinese Names

You are not a person in China until you have  mobile phone and a Chinese name. Unlike in the United States phones are very cheap and the service plane are even cheaper. People often text more then they talk because that is even cheaper. The current naming system in China is very complex, most children have a last, middle, and first name, however, with the one child policy this might change because the extended families will not be very big so people will not need middle names to distinguish who is who. The parents are given 30 days to name their kids after they are born; this is mainly because people are named after events and milestones so people are given time to figure this out along with the name has to follow the following rules: name has to sound good together, consider if  the 3 names together mean anything, does the name have auspicious meaning, or sound like another auspicious meaning word, the characters have to look good together, and a 6 year old needs to be able to learn to writhe the characters. This is a lot of things to consider when naming a child and the kinda ironic part is that many kids in the same generation born around the same time end up with the exact same names, sometimes even last names. In news papers they will refer to people by last name, but since there are only like 100 last names the author is often confused how the Chinese know who they are talking about. To try and help with this titles are important, nicknames help too, and they love to have Western names!

7. Finding Your Way in China – the Semantics of Time and Place:

Fallows describes a gap between Western culture and Chinese  culture when it comes to the physical world, which means order, place, direction, and even time. The Chinese language was originally written in a way where it is read top down then left to right, but for the most part has been changed to be read like Western texts. In china they focus on things from big to small and not the other way around like we do like family last name comes first then your personal name, in an address it goes: country first, city, street number, then apartment number, and the date is written year, month, day. East to west is the predominant axis. This makes directions and maps confusing, but in general the Chinese do not really use maps so they were inconsistent and unreliable. Fallows describes how no one knows how to give directions really either, her friends tells her this is because when you grow up in a village you  just know where to go you do not need directions, but they do often get lost in new places. She does give the maps the benefit of the doubt so many of them are off because the street, layouts, roads, and businesses are constantly changing. In general, a lot of things from there culture to ours would be considered backwards: ask where and get how long, walk backwards to go forwards, up in space also means behind in time and down in space means ahead in time.

12. Rules to Follow and Rules to Break

China has a lot of rules and the author stats the Chinese have a inner compass that tells them which rules to follow and which to ignore, but this is something that she/foreigners will often struggle with. Her friend describes that it is impossible to regard their rules “normal” in a way that we would regards rules. Even the Chinese agree that  there are too many rules, but they say they are ready arsenal for the authorities if they choose.  Many  people will break the rules just because they can. Fallows notices that she starts to understand  the system better with time and her attitude starts to change and she starts to break more rules as well. There are a lot of rules however that people always follow and it is not something that you should break. Don’t hug, don’t point, beckon fingers pointing down, only same genders should hold hands, bow slightly when showing respect, raise hans to chest and give a few shaves to signal “good fortune” , and when audience applauds applaud back. The one child policy should be followed, hometown registration system that gives you benefits, foreigners are supposed to carry passports always, no indoor heating south of the Yangtze River  in schools. A quote at the end of  the chapter is “Ask not for permission, but for forgiveness”  this quote is pretty funny because it basically is saying do whatever and just ask as though you regret it after.