I apologize for two China-bashing posts in such short order. The following articles suggest that the emerging Chinese middle class are in all likelihood going to behave like the upright walking primates they are and seek status with any and every opportunity. Eating wildlife is presently a way to show off in China. From Reuters:
Chinese police have seized hundreds of bear paws and dead pangolins that smugglers had injected with tranquillisers ...
Other exotic wildlife that make their way onto Chinese dinner tables include camel's hump and monkey's brain. Tiger bones dipped in liquor are considered a tonic and tiger penis is believed to be an aphrodisiac.
"Wow that pangolin soup I had for lunch made me sleepy. Why is it dark outside?" Luckily, conflicting self-interest as well as a healthy dose of self-preservation is starting to have an impact.
As I mentioned earlier, the Chinese are also starting to "take out" the tropical forests on their side of the world to feed their unleashed egos. These problems might be ameliorated with a few articles in China's mainstream press suggesting that civilized Westerners consider those who eat wildlife uncouth, even lowbrow (not to offend the few remaining cavemen out there) and that tropical hardwood flooring is for unenlightened cretins. To alter behavior, all you need to do is change what is cool. Sounds somewhat stupid, I know, but somewhat stupid is what we are. We have the subconscious instincts of social primates and they tend to lead us about by the nose.
Finally, according to China Watch, the Chinese government is backing away from using corn and wheat to make ethanol. They are growing a little uneasy about food supplies. This may turn out to be the tip of an iceberg.
A similar concern is starting to develop in Europe as well. I wonder how free markets will respond to rising food costs, as biofuels are presently competing for the same plants (not that biofuels have much to do with a free market at this time). As an American farmer, I would be jumping with joy. You might see the price of both go up until something else comes along, like cheaper imported biofuels or the perfection of cellulosic technologies.
Will our government respond with more subsidies, coupled with import tariffs, in an attempt to protect the growing infrastructure of soybean-based biodiesel and coal-fired, corn-based ethanol refineries from world competition, or let them compete, and possibly lose, on the free market as our carmakers are presently doing?
Comments
View as Flat
bookerly Posted 8:47 pm
03 May 2006
Did you know that Americans murder millions of dogs and cats each year just because they are tired of playing with them?? And love dropping bombs on five year olds in foreign countries?? And so on and so on....
You could have read the article as "Wow, the Chinese government is really trying to do something about the illegal wildlife trade."
And don't think it doesn't happen in the USA. Look at all the smuggling rings that bring endangered species to America for pets. Now, biodiversivist, aren't you ashamed of yourself?? Wait, you mean YOU don't do any of this? But aren't ALL Americans responsible for the actions of ANY Americans??
FWIW, most Chinese don't eat such foods, many would be disgusted by them. Including the growing number of vegetarians and animals rights supporters. But, then all Americans eat in an environmentally responsible manner, right?
Is it possible to discuss the problems without "bashing"? If it isn't, nobody on this side of the world will be listening.
I could go on with the bashing of America, but you may get the idea. The way in which we discuss issues matters.
So, my take is that the main purpose of your post was to alienate any wandering Chinese visitors. Right?
patrick
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 5:29 am
04 May 2006
Your dog analogy was an interesting one, considering that eating dogs is also an old Chinese custom, which is now waning as I hope the practice of eating wildlife will continue to do.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com
Permalink
bookerly Posted 7:56 am
04 May 2006
There is a big difference between bashing and praising. Rewarding desired behavior is a more effective way of promoting change than punishing undesired behavior.
Saying "Chinese" do something suggests that all Chinese thing alike or perform the same actions. Well, they do all get out of bed in the morning and put on some clothes, but so do most people in the world. After that their days, ideas and sometimes values tend to differ.
"Bashing" in terms of Chinese culture would be considered "rude". People generally tend to ignore what "rude" people are saying. It is not an effective means of communication, so that is a major "difference" between bashing and praising.
I am sorry my point about dogs was misunderstood. I was merely pointing out that writing about the practices of a few as being reflective of the belief system of the many is not an accurate way of portraying a people.
Personally, I hope that everyone will stop eating meat (but I won't hold my breath! (grin)). However, I do not regard meat eaters as immoral demons from Hell (smile).
If we can learn to talk to each other without bashing, we can build a movement. Otherwise, we will have trouble working together for our common goals.
peace,
patrick
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 10:12 am
04 May 2006
Anti-Muslim stereotypes since 9/11 have been just as pernicious, disgracefully so among Muslims, Arabs and South Asians in this country. As I likely wrote on another occasion, if the 9/11 terrorists had not crashed their planes into three buildings with somewhat abstract symbolism, but rather into the Statue of Liberty and the dome of the Capitol -- probably resulting in many fewer deaths, in fact -- , the Bushies would surely have nuked Baghdad by the end of the day, and countless other innocent people would have died.
That said, I think Biodiv understands this already very well. I think he meant "China-bashing" pretty facetiously. He was not saying all Chinese are bad people.
And, I am glad to have seen the Reuters article. And in that connexion, I wish you would tell us more about something you raised a while ago, the use of herbal substitutes for animal parts in Chinese traditional medicine. How developed is it at this point? Is it really catching on?
Permalink
bookerly Posted 12:02 pm
04 May 2006
Dear Caniscandida,
The short answer is that I don't know. The government is encouraging it, people are doing research. Television is full of commercials featuring famous atheletes and movie stars speaking against the use of parts from endangered animals and pleaing for their protection. There have been alternatives for (most/all??) items developed. This is why the Chinese police ARRESTED people and why they were SMUGGLING the animal parts.
But is there an underground trade? Yes, like in America and other countries. There are those who cling to the old ways. (Ironically, American ally Taiwan is, the last I heard, much worse on this issue.)
Young people get environmental education all the time (there is so much of it in their textbooks that now when they see it, they groan "oh no, not again, we already know that").
The way in which we speak matters (and we can all make mistakes, I have a special shelf inside my cheek, labelled "rest foot here").
The tone set in the original posting will not lead to discussion, but only to ignoring the information biodiversisist wishes to convey.
patrick
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 5:55 pm
04 May 2006
Yes, I know, I know, young people are remarkably boring. Not least by complaining how bored they are.
Kids, you know. And kids, of course, will be kids.
On Taiwan: I am not at all surprised. Though I suspect the Chinese from Taiwan doubt the full-heartedness of an American greeting as "ally."
As I suggested on an earlier occasion, our people in DC should have really gone all out in greeting Hu Jintao. I think we missed a major opportunity there. The foreign policy of the Bushies has already set us back decades. Realistically, we are pretty desperate. God knows how we can repair the damage they have made, and how long it will take.
We should do all we can to cultivate both the Chinese and the Indians. Frankly, being a Bollywood fan (and an Indo-European linguist), I would rather learn Hindi than Mandarin; to all Jane Austen fans everywhere, I highly recommend "Bride and Prejudice," much better than Keira Knightley's "Pride and Prejudice," though that stars the inimitably stunning Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourg, and has some lovely props and backgrounds.
But I do indeed intend to learn some basic
Mandarin grammar before I die. A major goal of mine is to learn something of all the great classical languages of the world. Persian and Sanskrit should not be hard, I think, to a classicist. Chinese is another story.
On animals: I believe we join hands, as friends, in working for better animal welfare, less animal abuse, greater respectability of vegetarianism. I know you are working hard in your hemisphere; I shall keep on doing what I can over here.
Permalink
Mr M Posted 12:19 am
05 May 2006
Incidentally, I'd hate to think any middle class American ate a dish to impress (e.g. lobster or oysters). But then again, no-one cares how many oysters you eat either.
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 1:47 am
05 May 2006
Just in terms of what individual animals suffer at human hands, the killing of a very common, widely domesticated mammal such as a cow, and the killing of a rare or endangered wild mammal such as a bear, or even more obviously a tiger, are equivalent. (Leaving aside the circumstances and method of the killings for the moment. Those are ethically relevant, but not for this issue.)
Only when we agree that biodiversity has value (and maybe we do not so agree!), does the killing of the bear or the tiger become much less justifiable than the killing of the cow.
One question that I am working on is, Is the value that we assign to biodiversity purely anthropocentric? Is it, in a sense, aesthetic, or self-serving to human beings, of interest only to human beings, only because human beings sense in it something interesting, or practical, or beautiful? Or, on the other hand, does there exist something that can be called a cosmic "common good," extending far beyond the interests of human beings alone, for which a healthy biodiversity might be considered highly desirable?
On a completely different matter: I have no idea what you mean when you say the Chinese are not ethnocentric, at least not as much as Americans. On the face of it, that does not look at all right. But I leave it to Patrick to comment.
Permalink
bookerly Posted 5:28 am
05 May 2006
There are certainly a number of expensive restaurants where Americans spend incredible sums of money on what must be considered status meals. Such meals exist in all cultures.
And there was that weird tv show (I have been away for a while), which always had an "eat this and win" component. Frequently involved worms, as I recall. Is that eating for status?
I am not the person to say what Mr.M means, he should speak for himself. Ethnocentrism being one of those terms whose beauty (and meaning) is in the eye of the beholder.
Back to the origins of this topic, the Chinese government is exploring various forms of using biomass to make ethanol. There was also a very interesting show on CCTV9 (English language programming) about a new pilot program helping farmers learn to use drip systems which save water and reduce the need for pesticides as well as fertilizer. The government is working with German agricultural specialists to roll this out.
Funny, how for better or worse, the rest of the world (outside of America) is trying to find solutions to environmental issues... at least that is how it seems.
It is also interesting who little Indian bashing goes on (not that I am in favor of it! merely noting that it does not at this time exist). In looking at whom we bash and why, we should also look at who we don't bash. It may help us to see our prejudices better!
patrick
Permalink