Studying Chinese

I came across these things today for people who are interested in studying Chinese. Quite frankly, I'm not sure how I missed them before but these should be some awesome tools when online and I think these will help to jumpstart my own degrading language skills.

The first is a Taiwanese site that prints the news in Chinese and English side by side. The LibertyTimes will now be bookmarked on my machine and I hope to be able to step through a couple of articles each week. I found out about this site from ChineseHacks which also gave me information on how to convert traditional Chinese to simplified Chinese characters (and vice versa) using a plugin (Tong Wen Tang) available via Firefox, Chrome and Safari.  He also showed another plugin from PeraPera-Kun which offers an incredible online dictionary that will help to translate Chinese characters on the web into English.

I've tried them out on my browser (FF 4.0) and am very pleased thus far. If you are serious about wanting to study Chinese online (or at least being able to brush up on it as in my case) for free, these are some pretty cool resources. Rest assured, I will have both LibertyTimes and ChineseHacks bookmarked for future reference!

(11/17/11 - I just discovered that the PeraPera-Kun website changed their domain and I have updated my link here accordingly.)

Chinese Harmony

I was reading some things today and one of the things that caught my eye had to do with the Chinese desire for social harmony and how strongly the government argues that it cannot permit any protests or disagreement with its method of governance. Whenever an activist or dissident attempts to raise his or her voice about their concerns with things in China (and there is certainly no lack of things to worry or be upset about in China - much like anyplace else on Earth), they are typically hushed up either through intimidation or arrest. The reason for this is that the government is unwilling to tolerate any dissent and would prefer that everyone simply live in harmony with one another. After all, there has been enough chaos and anarchy in recent Chinese history and there is no need to repeat it according to the government.

What the government typically neglects to point out, however, is that all of the disharmony that existed in the recent past is due directly to the government and its actions - most notably by Mao. The Cultural Revolution was orchestrated and directed by Mao (vis-a-vis his intermediaries in the Gang of Four who were subsequently assigned all of the blame after Mao's death so as to preserve Mao's stature) and that is the most grievous example of the social disharmony brought on by the government. This does not include the student protests in 1976 after Zhou Enlai's death, the protests in 1989 after Hu Yaobang's death, the Hundred Flowers campaign and the Great Leap Forward in the 1950's or the numerous bloody purges that took place as a result of Mao's desire for constant revolution to weed out any potential opposition. Furthermore, it is the distinct lack of any critical review of those times, official or unofficial, within China that allows for the ability to learn from those mistakes. Instead, they are glossed over as an unfortunate period of time in which there was much chaos (without probing too deeply into the actual reasons why) and a deep desire to only move forward and develop a deep sense of nationalistic pride.

Unfortunately, the only way in which harmony can truly be achieved is to come to terms with the past and to be able to move past it. Possibly the best example of this would be post-apartheid South Africa which, while not perfect (but what ever is perfect?), offers the vision of what can be achieved when the aggrieved can have the opportunity to reconcile with the aggressors. Perhaps this can never be achieved (after all, one of Mao's stated objectives during the Cultural Revolution was to destroy all of the relationships upon which society was framed) but, if it is not even tried, there can be no hope of ever moving past it and it will forever stain the social fabric of China - let alone prevent any chance at the social harmony that the government preaches ad nauseam at the remotest threat of disagreement.

Grateful Citizen

I was thinking yesterday about how grateful I am to be a citizen of the United States of America. But, being me, I wanted to determine for exactly what I was so grateful. As it turns out, I am grateful for things that may not seem to go together. But it is a crazy patchwork of things that has made this country not just survive, but thrive, in the manner that it has for more than 200 years. Granted, that is a short time in the relative history of many other nations but a sign of the dynamism and wonder that is this nation.

So, what are the things for which I am grateful (as a citizen)? There are three and all are enshrined in the US Bill of Rights (and upheld through the law):

• The right to bear arms (the right, not the obligation)
• The right to freedom of speech (and the right to suffer the consequences accordingly)
• The freedom of the press to monitor the actions of both the government and the people (admittedly, I am an NPR - National Public Radio - fan)

 Yet these are seemingly incongruous within the current political landscape. Or, to be more precise, certain political groups would support the right to bear arms but deny the right of NPR (or most other news organizations) as being politically biased and therefore useless - and vice versa. Yet it is the ability of these ideals to exist with each other that makes this nation stronger, in my opinion. My right to bear arms is to help moderate the power of the government and help to ensure that it remains answerable to its citizens rather than a tyranny under which the citizens must suffer. My right to speak my mind without fear of arbitrary punishment as a result - though I am (and should be) held accountable when my speech causes undue harm to others (such as shouting "Fire!" in a crowded building). And the right of the press to monitor and report upon the government, in particular, helps to ensure, much like the right of the citizenry to own guns, that it will remain responsive and responsible to the people which it is designed to serve.

The key part of all three of these things is that they all be practiced in moderation. And herein lies the point of contention with many who inexplicably (at least in my mind) oppose them in given situations. Just because you have the right to own a gun does not mean you have the right to use it on your fellow citizens. Just because you have the right to speak your mind means you should do so without thinking first. And the power of the media should be moderated to ensure that it is not a power unto itself but a moderating force upon those it should report.

It is a delicate balance and there have been, and continue to be, the occasional errors. But, for the most part, it has worked and I am glad and grateful that it does.

(As a side note, I should also mention that writing early in the morning makes it more difficult to recall certain words that I wanted to use but couldn't immediately recall. I reserve the right to edit this post later when I remember the proper words. EDIT - "arbitrary" was the word I was looking for.)