Chinese Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo has succumbed to liver cancer. Lionized in the West, his passing was little noted in China. Just a smidgen of reflection would explain the dichotomy.
Liu did not win the Nobel Prize for physics or economics or any of the others administered by the Nobel Committee in Stockholm. He won the Peace Prize administered out of Oslo.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee is appointed by the Norwegian parliament and has been responsible for the most politicized honor among the Nobel prizes.
Since there hasn’t been a whole lot of peace around the world, it’s understandable that there were more years when a Peace Prize was not awarded than for any of the other Nobel Prizes. Some of the committee’s award choices were matters for debate.
The Peace Prize has been the most burdened in controversy. For example, some say the committee gave the prize to the Dalai Lama in part to atone for repeatedly passing over Mahatma Gandhi, universally recognized as the most deserving of the honor never to have received it.
The committee also rushed headlong in the opposite direction and couldn’t wait to see what Barrack Obama was going to do as president of the United States. They awarded Obama the Peace Prize shortly after he was elected president just to flaunt Norwegian indignation at the warmongering policies of George W Bush, Obama’s predecessor.
Alas for the prestige and credibility of the Norwegian committee and the Peace Prize, Obama would be hard-pressed to point to any achievements toward peace in his two terms as the US president.
If it’s easy to become a Peace Prize laureate, it’s hardly surprising that it’s a low bar for anyone to become a nominee for the honor. All it takes is possessing credentials with the proper slant.
The late Harry Wu (aka Wu Hongda) is a good example. The aftermath of his death last year has revealed him to be a thief and philanderer. He stole the money set aside for Chinese human-rights activists and he was a serial groper of women.
Wu rose to fame when he was arrested as he tried to enter China under disguise. After his much publicized release, he trotted around the world as a self-proclaimed defender of human rights in China. His anti-China criticism and attendant publicity got him nominated for the Peace Prize.
Wu and his ilk have learned that there is a career in paimapi, a Chinese saying that literally means petting the horse’s rump or, in a cruder version, inducing equine flatulence. It’s a Chinese expression for obsequious flattery.
The profit is in petting the Westerner’s mapi, by expressing admiration for the Western concept for democracy as if only through democracy can one achieve human rights and dignity.
The important difference between Wu and Liu is that while Wu remained in the safety of the protective West, Liu went back to China from a teaching position in the US to advocate the overthrow of the Communist Party of China (CPC).
Liu even expressed the idea that 300 years as a colony of a Western power would have done China wonders and enabled it to catch up to the standards of Western democracy. That was paimapi of the first order. No wonder the West adored him.
Conveniently overlooked by Liu was that in the nearly three decades since Liu went back to China, it has become the second-largest or largest economy in the world, depending on the yardstick used.
According to Pew’s regular polls of the sentiments of people in China, their satisfaction and approval rating of the country’s one-party rule and CPC has hovered around 80% in most recent years.
Thus we have a situation where Western countries that boast of popular approval ratings under 50% hectoring China to reform. They encourage China to change its system of government so that its popularity can be more like the West’s.
May Liu Xiaobo rest in peace. It is difficult to know how long he will be remembered in the West. He is already a forgotten man in China.
Wood Wu it is about your mindset & narrative…people are now thinking the West claims on democracy is not necessary the only way to go…It comes a time a system like that of China may be necessary. From the way you put your point, it seems that you either an axe to grind against China system & so dead on the western way or democracy is infallible…there is more than one way to govern a country & there are time certain countries may need a system that may not agree with yours or that of western stlye democracy…
Ru Meng absolute freedom gives them right to even rape women freely like how it is done in India
Michael O’Brien do you or do you not have proof Dr Koo was paid? It’s that simple, McCarthyism fails when openly challenged.
Charles Liu. Your attempt to label me a McCarthyist is proof enough. Your diatribes are ‘standard operating procedure’ for any propagandist. Your aim is to discredit western democracy, and any individual or organisation that supports western democracy. As such, there is no point debating you. 對牛彈琴，草木皆兵，掩耳盜鈴。
Ooo, "paid propagandist". Well, let’s see some proof of your empty McCarthyist accusation. Remeber Liu Xiaobo’s NED funding is well documented – straight from NED’s own grant publication.
Wood Wu too bad you are not the missiah of Chinese constitutionality. 106 as add on punishment is constitutional, until you go thru the process of challenging it in Chinese court successfuly. As to your opinion, even you agree everyone disagree with you 😛
Charles Liu …You are right again, when and after LXB was convicted, 105 was not in dispute. At present nobody sees 105 as uncontitutional. I am the only one to see so. It is time to say goodbye.
Wood Wu your opinion is not a fact. Go make a case if you feel so strongly. Fact when is LXB was convicted 105 was not in dispute.
Charles Liu …Your were right in saying that, there is no dispute against the constitutionality of criminal law article 105. I was trying to raise a dispute and have not succeeded yet. At present, nobody has come to my point: article 105 is unconstitutional. Why, because it rejects people’s right to fight for state power while the article 79 of the Chinese constitution gives people the right to fight for state power.
Wood Wu who cares…the issue in your mind is freedom or that Liu was seemingly fighting for freedom or democratic rule in China. It is not whether Article 79 would mean democracy or otherwise. Why so fixate on democracy as though it is a magic formula for freedom. Is there really true freedom in democracy or is democracy rule going to ensure that freedom is allowed? That is in my mind a flawed premises. I live in a allegedly democratic country but I don’t have the freedom to expressed my view publicly in the press which is control by the dominant political party of the day. Tell me is there freedom in Malaysia or other country including Singapore that there is real freedom. Forget about absolute freedom..
Wood Wu Repeating your ignorance doesnt make you right. you did not read 106 did you? 106 is add on punishment for 105. read it, 106 said punishment should be more severe if 103 104 105 is violated with collusion involving foreign entity. As to constitutionality of 105, there is no dispute against itin China, not now not when LXB was rid. Go ahead and file one.
Ru Meng …What were you talking about?
Charles Liu …LXB was sent to jail under the criminal law article 105, not 106, it means LXB did not violate article 106, It means further, foreign funding was irrelevant in LXB’s case. It could further mean LXB never got any foreign funding. Besides LXB, hundreds of people were sent to jail for violating article 105, none for violating 106. Nobody ever was found receiving foreign funding by the Chinese government or court, but only you, Charles Liu, had found so. Charles Liu also built a connection between criticism and funding. Without foreign funding, Chinese people will not criticize the Chinese government nor the CPC. In Charles Liu’s eyes, the Chinese people always can be bought by money; the Chinese are very cheap, in Charles’s eyes that is.
Ru Meng …Welcome to the discussion. You were right to say there is no real or ideal democracy in the West. Please take a look at Article 79 of the Chinese constitution. Does it mean democracy? According to said Article, people like you could be eligible to be elected as the Chinese president.
Wood Wu you did not read 106 did you? 106 is add on punish for 105. go read it, 106 said punishment should be more severe if 103 104 105 is violated with collusion with foreign entity. As to constitutionality of 105, there is no dispute against it. Go ahead and file one.