Having tried, but failed, to stop North Korea from launching its rocket, I prayed that the China-India war would not break out as there was nothing more I could do. Fortunately, my prayer was answered. If I had to guess, the Obama administration must have applied some pressure on President Hu Jintao. And if they did so, it must have been because I had spilled the beans on China's war plan.
On Tuesday April 14, President Obama gave another economic speech at Georgetown University. He made five points in his speech, signaling that he would back me as the 5th generation of Chinese leadership.
Frankly, I was very much unimpressed with his speech at the time. David Brook's column on April 21 probably best summarized my feelings. Yes, Mr. Obama said many words that resonated with me in his speech. But his recent actions did not match his words, as I alluded to before. And his support of Hu made me doubt his sincerity even more.
Politically, to be the 5th generation of Chinese leadership is the least favorable option for me. (Personally, of course, to be the 5th generation of Chinese leadership gives me room to seek readdress from the governments on some of wrongs inflicted on me.) Throughout its history, China has never been a democracy. To be the leader-in-waiting is perhaps to be in the most dangerous position in authoritarian China. Here, if you lose a democratic election, you merely lose an office. Whilst in China, if you lose a power struggle, you could lose your life. (But I have to say that Chinese politics has become much less brutal in recent decades. Still, the fundamentals remain the same.) And I know that I do not have the necessary skills to succeed in politics. -- That's probably why my father urged me to stay away from politics in his dying wishes. -- This is especially true when I am compared to Hu Jintao, who is a particularly formidable opponent. The mere facts that he had come out of years of leader-in-waiting with a strong faction and then succeeded in gradually wrestling power away from his predecessor are the obvious proofs.
My only political strength is in my desire for China's democratization. If I could be successful in leading China in that direction, it could potentially change the game. And it appeared that my proposal (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4 so far) for China's democratization had been well received in China, at least in some corners. I genuinely believe that China's democratization is not only good for China, but also for the world.
I decided that I should try first to be considered for the 4th generation of Chinese leadership. That's why I returned two books on Thursday April 16, signaling my challenge to Hu Jintao. (Because I did not want to completely lose my personal cause, and with the B.C. provincial election under way, I sent an email to a local newspaper on Wednesday night in a desperate attempt to get on the news here. I checked my email many times the next day before I left for the library.)
Unfortunately, nothing happened. I was resigned to borrowing one more book to bring the total number to five. However, a CBC documentary on Saturday morning changed my mind.
Now, I know that CBC has never been friendly to me ever since before I became a "public" figure. If my memories are correct, CBC Radio sent me "personal" bullying messages even before I finished writing my first report. (Indeed, in the morning of Friday April 17, CBC Radio's hourly news had a piece from China about its potential social instability. It was obviously intended to influence the Canadian public to put the blame on me if something disorderly did happen as a result of my changing the number of books on loan to 4 the day before.) However, this documentary was particularly biased, distasteful, and indeed, dishonest.
The documentary is centered around the aftermath of last year's Sichuan earthquake. Throughout, it cast the Chinese government in a negative light. Surprisingly, Hu Jintao, who is the head of CCP and who wants to continue the authoritarian regime, was nowhere to be seen in the whole film, not even in a picture frame. (Correction after watching the documentary again online: Hu did appear in the film, just in a flash moment of Olympic-related pageantry.) At the mean time, it called Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao a "communist dictator". This after I had written before that Mr. Wen was the first to open to democratization among top leaders in China. (I should add that it took tremendous courage to do so for someone inside the present system. And CBC may not have known this: Premier Wen is one of the few top leaders without his own faction.) Other biases were too many to list. I'll just give an example of subtle distortion: A resident in the quake zone was filmed to say in Chinese that the government told them to "start anew" or "start over" with their lives. Yet on the TV screen, the translation became "to get on with your lives".
Apparently, CBC had already decided which side to support, Hu Jintao or me. Why? The only reason I could think of was that CBC figured that that was Mr. Obama's position. (I would suggest that this had nothing to do with President Obama's personal popularity, given its consistent position with respect to my file throughout the Bush years.) And CBC saw that I would be brought out by the Chinese government because of the latest "endorsement" by Mr. Obama, they wanted to tell the Canadian public in advance that I was merely a product of "communist propaganda", as the central theme of documentary itself suggested.
As I said, my only political strength is my advocacy for China's democratization and the accompanying proposal. Even with whatever support I could garner from within China, my strength depends heavily on the support of Canadian and American public. For that to happen, the media here can not intentionally be against me. Without public support, it would be foolish of me to venture into Chinese politics. And if the Canadian media, which, as I learned over the years, is essentially liberal like the CBC, thought that Mr. Obama was not genuinely in support of me, I doubted even more of my choice.
That's why I borrowed two more books to bring the total number to 6 later that day. I was quite relieved after I came back from the library in the afternoon, certain that I had made the right decision. I even took a walk in the park nearby. It was in the evening that I realized that others had seen number 3 in the 6 books due to the fact that three of the books were written by the same author, Amitai Etzioni. (As I said before, "if I want to signal numbers within a total number, I would go to different libraries".) Bothered by the perception, I decided to go to the library again to fix the "problem". My plan was to switch one of the Etzioni books with a new one.
Carnegie reading room was the only VPL branch that opened on Saturday night. In order to avoid creating the perception of another number within the 6 books, I decided to limit my borrowing choice to social science books. Carnegie is a very small branch and I found that I did not have many books to choose from. In the end, just to be safe, I picked The Unconscious Civilization by John Ralston Saul, a book I had mentioned in my blogs before. It was after I had come back from the library that I realized that I had unwittingly created an even stronger perception of number 3: The six books on loan now consisted of 3 books by American authors and 3 by Canadian authors. (Looking back, I can see that the chance that I would escape from this perception was very slim that night because Carnegie not only has a limited collection of social science books, it also has a very high concentration of Canadian contents. Indeed, the four or five books I chose to replace one of Etzioni's books were all written by Canadians.)
Needless to say, I was extremely frustrated. Believe me, it took deliberate and conscious efforts to avoid such perceptions because there were so many unexpected ways you could separate a bunch of books into different groups. Overall, I found my book borrowing activities had become less and less enjoyable. For one thing, I needed to be careful lest I offended anyone with my reading list. And I had hoped that my reading list would help me to send out my political and philosophical messages, given my poor writing skills. Yet, judging by the almost non-existent response I got, it often appeared to me that I was all alone in my endeavor.
That's why I decided to return all the books the next day and instead borrowed 6 movie DVDs. (I needed some entertainment.) I spent a good hour or so in choosing the 6 DVDs, again to make sure nobody could see any numbers there other than the number 6. It was during the checkout, however, that I was told that I could only borrow 5 DVDs at a maximum. Feeling a profound sense of irony, I returned the 5 DVDs a few minutes later and got a copy of VPL's Loan Periods, Limits, Fines and Charges from library staff. With this piece of paper in hand, I borrowed 6 book CDs, again with careful selection.
It was Norman Spector's column on the Globe on Tuesday April 21 that changed my mind again. Reading his column, I realized that even though I was very sure that the common philosophy I advocated for both China and America was the right one, it took tremendous political courage for Mr. Obama to even try to bring the American public along. Obviously he, like every other politician, was not immune to political expediency. But I hope his backing of me and my political philosophy is genuine. Besides, I am really tired now.
With these considerations, I returned one CD to the library yesterday, signaling my candidacy for the 5th generation of Chinese leadership.
Indeed, it's not easy to be a politician. And I can only hope that everyone will throw their support to make me a strong 5th generation of Chinese leadership.
Update (20090428):
I got a glimpse of President Obama’s weekly radio address on TV on Saturday. Frankly, I had not expected a significant change of attitude from him after my above blog. That’s why I switched the 5 books CDs to 5 books without even watching his address in its entirety. It was only after I had watched the entire video and read the text of his address on Saturday night that I realized that he was now backing me as the 4th generation of Chinese leadership.
An improvement, certainly. Perhaps even what I had hoped for subconsciously. -- The next day, I went to VPL to make the total number of books on loan 4.
Yesterday, as I sat down and looked at the situation, I asked myself: “Is this what it boils down to, a contest between Hu Jintao and me for the top job in China?” Frankly, I do not even know what the job entails on a daily basis. I accepted President Obama’s “improved endorsement” probably more to get out of my miserable situation than anything else.
If I had an agenda, it was to democratize China with a political philosophy that could simultaneously serve as an ideal platform for dialogue and cooperation between China and United States. I know that my democratization proposal (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4 so far) had been well received in China, at least at some corners. Mr. Obama’s “improved endorsement” of me in his Saturday address was made after I had posted my above blog. It probably should be viewed as an endorsement of the common philosophy I advocated more than anything else.
If that’s the case, I don’t need to go back to China as long as both peoples are informed of this common philosophy. China can start the preparation for political reform now. At the same time, both countries can start laying the foundation for a stable and durable partnership.
These two things - proposing democratization in China and bringing a pair of potential rivals to the path of dialogue and cooperation - would be my contributions to the world. Considering that, precisely because of these back in February, I was regarded to potentially be the 3rd generation of Chinese leadership by my supporters in China with the acknowledgement of the Obama administration, I returned one book to VPL last night.
President Hu can keep his job in China. I just wish he will grow a spine for the rest of his term. At the mean time, I could seek my readdress here and if I am lucky, I could probably have a chance to work for Mr. Warren Buffett - even if it’s just for a short period of time - before I go back to China.
That would be something, eh?
Update (20090501):
Apparently, not everyone was happy with my above proposal. I borrowed one more book yesterday to bring the total back to four.
But if am going to replace Hu Jintao, shouldn’t I at least get compensated for the atrocious wrongs inflicted upon me first?
Update (20090502):
That's it. I've had enough. I'm out.
Six books on loan today.
