The Jackie Chan Puzzlement

By Chip Tsao | published Apr 30, 2009

Sparks have been flying at Jackie Chan since his fateful remarks that China is best left a nation of puppets who need to be controlled, lest they end up with a (semi) democratic mess like what Hong Kong and Taiwan now suffer from. Call it an innocent “the emperor wears no clothes” outcry, but the patriotic kung fu star—branded by his opponents as someone “who has never read many books”—only expressed what he honestly thought, and gave voice to the repugnance and fear that is widely shared among the ruling elite both in Hong Kong and China toward the ordinary Chinese person.

It is also a dominant official view that since the Chinese population consists of mostly ill-educated peasants, the Chinese people are not intelligent enough to adopt a Westminster-style democracy. Had Hilary Clinton openly preached this on her recent trip to Beijing, she would have been labeled a racist by the editorial board of the New York Times. But this view is commonly shared by more and more patriotic Chinese, especially overseas Chinese students studying for an MBA or electronic engineering degree at Harvard or Cambridge.

We are proud to take up the superpower’s burden by liberating the Tibetans from the boredom of daily prayers and endless Buddhist scripture-reading classes by introducing them to modern amenities such as karaoke bars, shark’s fin restaurants and massage parlors—even though the ungrateful Tibetans continue to curse us for destroying their religious faith and tranquil lifestyle. At the same time, we doubt the cerebral nature of our own people, believing that the Chinese are simply not bright enough to play the complex game of electing our own government by universal franchise. The Chinese need to be tethered, and their mouths need to be bound so that they may only eat or drink, but not disagree.

For the Chinese, is it politically correct to assume that we are born unequal compared to the Americans, the Indians, or the Pakistanis, and support the motherland’s iron-fisted rule because it is more patriotic to do so? Or is it politically incorrect to embrace the so-called corrupt western liberal “imperialistic” view that all men should be born equal, with guaranteed human rights and freedoms?

Jackie Chan said he was confused. So was Yul Brynner, who played the unforgettable role of the bald-headed patriarchal King of Siam in the musical “The King and I.” He was keen to learn to speak English, but rejected the idea of learning from Lincoln and abolishing slavery—recall the broken English of one of his more memorable songs:
“When I was a boy, world was better spot. What was so was so, what was not was not. Now I am a man, world have changed a lot. Some things nearly so, others nearly not—what a puzzlement!”

It is indeed a very big puzzlement—Yul Brynner, Anna the English teacher, Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan, Chris Patten, Mao Zedong, the Cultural Revolution, Donald Tsang, etc., etc., etc.

A Jackie of All Trades

By Chip Tsao | published Apr 23, 2009

Jackie Chan is best remembered in his movies for his wacky kung fu stunts, not his dialogue. I always wondered why Hollywood producers have been a bit stingy toward him and saved the few enlightening lines of his films for more brainy folks like the quick-witted Chris Tucker. Here’s perhaps the answer. At an international forum in Hainan, with former president George Bush junior among the guests, Jackie Chan angered many Chinese people by commenting on politics. Chan said that the Chinese people may not deserve freedoms and “need to be controlled.”

Chan’s offensive remarks were interpreted by many to have branded the Chinese as what amounts to “a nation of slaves,” and he was asked to apologize for what he said. But instead of joining the angry Chan-bashing chorus, may I be allowed, for obvious sentimental reasons, to play the devil’s advocate and say a few words in defense of the kung fu emperor at such a rush hour?

First, the Chinese people have long been subject to a form of serious control—birth control. This has been a state-sponsored policy for at least the last three decades. It is a control widely welcomed by the world—a consensus shared by Deng Xiaoping, the United Nations, and many presidents of the United States. Hardly anyone would dispute that with a population already standing at 1.3 billion, the Chinese people would plunge the world into a more serious food and energy crisis if they were granted the reproductive freedoms enjoyed by the Swedes, Finns or Dutch. Is that a racist comment? I would say it’s more like Malthusian arithmetic and common sense.

And would any liberal western government loosen the immigration controls applied to the Chinese? China has a GDP comparable to the United States, and at the G20 conference, the Chinese leader was stood in the center of the front row next to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown—yet the Chinese passport is subject to harsh and hostile visa requirements from most “civilized nations” of the world, putting it in league with Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and Mozambique. In a way, Jackie Chan was simply being factual, although as a world celebrity and an Australian citizen, Chan is among the lucky few Chinese who are exempt from such controls.

And who would disapprove of public signs in simplified Chinese saying “flush toilet after use” or “please do not take excessive food you do not need” hanging at Carnegie Hall, the lavatories at the Louvre, or in three-star hotels in Hong Kong, Tokyo, Bangkok, or Manila? These are designed to apply some behavioral control to allegedly one of the oldest civilizations in the world. One can rant and rave at the kung fu master who kicks and pounces, but this time poor old Jackie Chan has pulled no punches in laying out his feelings for the Chinese.

崇洋潮

2009年4月22日

巨 星 成 龍 在 論 壇 發 表 了 一 番 政 見 ， 言 簡 意 賅 ， 有 如 下 各 點 ： A ， 台 灣 和 香 港 很 亂 ， 自 由 不 知 是 不 是 好 事 ； B ， 因 此 ， 中 國 人 還 是 受 到 管 一 管 才 好 ； C ， 中 國 人 崇 洋 、 崇 日 ， 就 是 不 崇 中 了 ； D ， 買 電 視 機 ， 我 成 龍 必 買 日 本 貨 ， 因 為 中 國 電 視 機 看 着 看 着 會 爆 炸 ， 中 國 的 奶 粉 也 一 樣 靠 不 住 。
成 龍 這 番 話 講 得 好 ， 因 為 每 一 點 ， 都 是 通 識 與 邏 輯 ， 都 可 以 辯 論 。
C 和 D ， 最 容 易 處 理 ； 成 龍 不 滿 中 國 人 崇 洋 崇 日 ， 但 他 自 己 立 時 也 承 認 ， 買 電 視 機 ， 必 取 日 本 貨 ， 棄 中 國 製 造 的 爆 炸 品 ， 這 就 反 倒 證 明 ： 崇 洋 崇 日 ， 是 對 的 ， 必 要 時 可 以 保 住 性 命 。
崇 洋 和 崇 日 ， 是 中 國 人 的 主 流 。 香 港 特 區 政 府 的 高 官 ， 叫 香 港 的 家 長 接 受 「 母 語 教 學 」 ， 自 己 卻 承 襲 前 英 國 殖 民 地 政 府 遺 留 下 來 的 「 海 外 教 育 津 貼 」 ， 把 子 女 送 英 國 的 寄 宿 學 校 ， 送 美 國 的 長 春 藤 。
還 有 曾 特 首 引 以 為 傲 的 英 國 爵 士 勳 銜 。 香 港 精 英 ， 率 先 表 範 ， 誰 還 不 崇 英 崇 美 ？ 介 紹 新 聘 的 副 局 長 、 政 治 助 理 、 政 制 事 務 局 局 長 林 瑞 麟 公 開 說 ： 他 們 多 畢 業 自 「 國 際 著 名 學 府 」 ─ 甚 麼 是 「 國 際 著 名 」 ？ 哈 佛 、 牛 津 、 倫 敦 ， 林 公 公 指 的 顯 然 不 是 中 國 的 清 華 或 北 韓 平 壤 的 金 日 成 大 學 。
在 生 活 的 文 化 行 為 之 上 ， 有 特 區 政 府 領 導 我 們 親 英 崇 洋 ， 香 港 人 不 可 以 不 聽 政 府 的 話 ， 我 們 當 然 要 親 英 、 戀 美 、 崇 洋 ， 這 條 路 ， 看 ， 有 那 麼 多 愛 國 精 英 帶 頭 ， 一 定 對 的 。
還 有 鄧 小 平 的 兒 子 和 孫 子 ， 查 一 下 ， 入 的 是 甚 麼 國 籍 ？ 美 國 籍 ， 對 吧 ？ 北 韓 是 中 國 人 民 的 老 朋 友 ， 抗 美 援 朝 ， 一 起 打 過 美 國 呢 。 請 問 ： 全 國 的 下 一 代 ， 不 崇 美 ， 還 崇 誰 ？
至 於 崇 日 ， 香 港 人 最 有 心 得 ： 卡 拉 OK 、 多 啦 A 夢 、 北 海 道 沖 涼 、 福 岡 賞 櫻 、 AV 女 、 《 禮 儀 師 的 奏 鳴 曲 》 ， 在 香 港 ， 通 通 都 有 票 房 ， 為 甚 麼 ？ 道 理 跟 成 龍 看 電 視 必 選 日 本 機 一 樣 簡 單 ： 因 為 日 本 是 一 個 不 會 無 端 端 爆 炸 而 令 你 大 吃 一 驚 的 地 方 。
崇 英 崇 美 的 潮 流 ， 中 國 大 陸 趕 上 了 。 崇 日 ， 則 有 待 香 港 人 進 一 步 感 化 傳 染 ， 但 看 看 馮 小 剛 的 《 非 誠 勿 擾 》 中 把 日 本 拍 得 如 詩 如 畫 的 一 段 ， 也 令 人 充 滿 信 心 。
來 來 來 ， 一 起 崇 洋 。 有 的 人 看 到 了 ， 恨 得 牙 癢 癢 的 ， 哈 哈 ， 讓 這 等 老 八 婆 搥 胸 頓 足 咒 罵 好 了 。 這 就 是 市 場 。 只 是 有 一 條 ： 中 國 的 胡 總 溫 總 ， 穿 西 裝 ， 不 像 成 龍 一 樣 穿 唐 服 ， 就 不 夠 「 中 國 人 」 ， 不 夠 崇 「 中 」 了 嗎 ？ 成 龍 心 直 口 快 ， 得 罪 了 「 上 面 」 而 不 知 ， 小 心 呀 。

Money Matters

By Chip Tsao | published Apr 16, 2009

Is it value for money? Eyebrows have been raised over the exuberant salaries and benefits enjoyed by senior SAR government officials. An “undersecretary” in Hong Kong earns more than $230,000 per month, even though their job consists largely, in the eyes of the public, of wining and dining at Yung Kee Restaurant or the Jockey Club while explaining government policies to businessmen and reporters. It is no surprise that, given the ten-year track record of the so-called “Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong”, some people have started questioning why an SAR undersecretary, let alone the chief executive, earns more than the British Prime Minister, who at present receives 127,334 sterling pounds annually in addition to a salary of 60,277 pounds as a Member of Parliament—about a pathetic $200,000 per month at the current exchange rate.

The salary scale of Hong Kong senior government officials is an anachronism. It is part of the so-called “through-train” agreed between China and the former colonial British, stipulated in Article 100 of the Basic Law, that “public servants in Hong Kong government departments may retain their seniority with pay, allowances, benefits and conditions of service no less favorable than before.” This means that government officials, while promoting “patriotic education” and introducing “mother-tongue teaching” to Hong Kong pupils and their parents, can quietly send their own children to for education in public schools and universities in Britain on Hong Kong taxpayers’ money. They are still reaping the attractive remuneration packages once offered to British colonial officials on expatriate terms.

Such terms were meant to provide “hardship compensation” in the old days. When a British civil servant was dispatched to a remote South Pacific island to be governor or police chief, he had the misfortune of being exiled for a few years from civilization. The attractive packages were a token of pity for the governor who wasted his life drinking his afternoon tea with a rifle under a coconut tree, under constant threat of a native rebellion, listening to chimpanzees squeal in the jungle instead of talking with learned friends talk about topics like Darwinism in a common room of the Gentlemen’s Club in London.

The SAR government has changed the red color of the post office and the police uniform to show China they are being politically correct and striking off the memories of the colonial past. But as far as money is concerned, there is reason for them to be selectively nostalgic. Earning more than Gordon Brown or even Barack Obama puts you under the feel-good illusion that you are taller than these guys.

Nudity is Free

By Chip Tsao | published Apr 09, 2009

I was told there used to be a nudist beach in Hong Kong frequented only by foreigners in the old colonial days. Compared with investing $26 billion in the white elephant project known as the West Kowloon cultural district, ceding a remote island to nudists today would cost almost nothing. But the government would be too scared to trigger another round of moral debate, fearing that setting up a nudist beach would attract thousands of complaints.

The reason is that in Chinese language, there is only one word for both “nudity” and “nakedness”.

In English, “nude” is always associated with paintings by Picasso or Renoir—a nude is an object of natural beauty created by God to be admired and appreciated in the light of art. Being “naked,” on the other hand, usually refers to a mere physical state in the bathroom or bedroom. Voyeurs look for nakedness, while life painting depicts nudity. But the Chinese word for both nudity and nakedness always bears pornographic connotations. It’s a word meant to trigger guilt in us from when we learn it in primary school. This is where the confusion and the taboo come from.

But there is a huge market for Chinese nudists nowadays. As Orientals, we Chinese have smoother skin that enables us to proudly exhibit our bodies right into our 60s without fear of looking like an old shabby turkey. Nudity is a statement of freedom, which can hardly be expressed in other alternative ways in China. Give us a remote island and let the nudists sort out themselves—backpackers from Shanghai, Manchuria, Sichuan or inner-Mongolia could implement a personal open policy here. It would soon flourish with nude bars and nude hotels.

If Hong Kong hesitates, China will do it sooner or later.

Promoting the culture of nudity would benefit gym enterprises like California Fitness. Hong Kong paparazzi will have a great time. Any potential candidate for the next chief executive could briefly appear on the nudist beach to signal their ambition with political muscles, like the late Chairman Mao, who took a dip in the Yangtze River on the eve of the Cultural Revolution. It was the first time the Chinese hailed the sight of the half-naked great leader floating on the current like a drifting slab of pork, before we realized that it was a coded message for the purge of his political rival, the vice-chairman Liu Shaoqi, who was to be branded as a counter-revolutionary. Just think of the excitement that would ensue when John Tsang, Henry Tang and Leung Chun-ying race to the beach like the scene of a 19th Century post-impressionist French landscape painting, and let the housewives take a vote.

Worse than Oliver Twist

By Chip Tsao | published Apr 02, 2009

Had an African-American man been gunned down by white cops in Los Angeles in this way, it would have sparked protests that could’ve turned worse, with burning cars, looted shops, and prominent figures such as Jesse Jackson condemning the police for racism and calling for the resignations of the police chief and mayor.

In Hong Kong, the death of a Nepali man who confronted a police constable with a table after being reported by his neighbor for “indecent exposure” because he took an innocent leak on a hillside never escalated into a Rodney King-style civil uprising. Only a few thousand Nepali countrymen led a peaceful march demanding an apology from the Hong Kong police and a “fair investigation.” The victim had been living on the hillside for years, jobless and lonely. When he went out for a pee that afternoon on his little piece of grassland, I doubt he thought he would be seen as a “threat” to the public.

Someone wielding a table against a shouting cop should more or less be treated as mentally unstable. Even if a bullet is necessary to calm him, being shot right in the head seems a bit too much for even a spooky Coen Brothers’ movie. Part of political correctness is a more sophisticated and considerate treatment of crimes involving ethnic minorities, who are powerless and marginalized in the community.

The police, in an apparent effort to spin-doctor public opinion, have leaked some information about the victim’s background. It turns out the man had a petty criminal record of shoplifting. But shoplifters are not in the same category as armed bank robbers. Shoplifting is more of a crime that would be committed by Oliver Twist, a poor orphan with no food or shelter. It’s not a very tactful strategy by the police to release this information—it just adds more doubt to the rationale behind the killing.

Worse than Oliver Twist

By Chip Tsao | published Apr 02, 2009

Had an African-American man been gunned down by white cops in Los Angeles in this way, it would have sparked protests that could’ve turned worse, with burning cars, looted shops, and prominent figures such as Jesse Jackson condemning the police for racism and calling for the resignations of the police chief and mayor.

In Hong Kong, the death of a Nepali man who confronted a police constable with a table after being reported by his neighbor for “indecent exposure” because he took an innocent leak on a hillside never escalated into a Rodney King-style civil uprising. Only a few thousand Nepali countrymen led a peaceful march demanding an apology from the Hong Kong police and a “fair investigation.” The victim had been living on the hillside for years, jobless and lonely. When he went out for a pee that afternoon on his little piece of grassland, I doubt he thought he would be seen as a “threat” to the public.

Someone wielding a table against a shouting cop should more or less be treated as mentally unstable. Even if a bullet is necessary to calm him, being shot right in the head seems a bit too much for even a spooky Coen Brothers’ movie. Part of political correctness is a more sophisticated and considerate treatment of crimes involving ethnic minorities, who are powerless and marginalized in the community.

The police, in an apparent effort to spin-doctor public opinion, have leaked some information about the victim’s background. It turns out the man had a petty criminal record of shoplifting. But shoplifters are not in the same category as armed bank robbers. Shoplifting is more of a crime that would be committed by Oliver Twist, a poor orphan with no food or shelter. It’s not a very tactful strategy by the police to release this information—it just adds more doubt to the rationale behind the killing.