6 ms·

At least in discussions on Western websites, the outrage always has an underlying racism permeating it. None of these people really have any right to be upset;

by ceol 13y ago

At least in discussions on Western websites, the outrage always has an underlying racism permeating it. None of these people really have any right to be upset; they didn't care about the artifact, they've probably never been to a museum, let alone done anything to help preserve these sorts of things. That, coupled with all sorts of Chinese stereotypes and slurs that happen to pop up in this outrage, makes me think it's less about an ancient artifact and more about getting their weekly fill of hating a faceless "other." You don't see the same hate for all of the American tourists who write their names on the Great Wall[0] or the Colosseum.[1] Seriously, what do they want from him now? What sort of responsibility do they want him to take, years after it happened? Beat him, as the top comment on NBC News (and many other sites) suggested? Ridiculous. Pay restitution to the Egyptian government? I'm sure neither one of these governments care enough to waste time over such a trivial matter as graffiti, and it's not like China is a stranger to people messing with ancient pieces of their society. So, really, most of the people "outraged" have acted more disgracefully than that child. [0]: http://i.imgur.com/rNsPC6V.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rNsPC6V.jpg [1]: http://www.hotsr.com/content/uploads/pictures/2013/01/Italy-Colorful-Coloss_Rasm.jpg http://www.hotsr.com/content/uploads/pictures/2013/01/Italy-...

jlgreco 13y ago
> None of these people really have any right to be upset; they didn't care about the artifact, they've probably never been to a museum, let alone done anything to help preserve these sorts of things. Would you say the same of everyone who was horrified by the dynamiting of the Buddhas of Bamiyan? I find your concept of "'right' to be upset" to be rather suspect.
- ceol 13y ago
  I would most certainly say the same to a bunch of anonymous, self-righteous Westerners crying for retribution in between parrotting disgusting stereotypes. But I'm not sure how you could think a child tourist scrawling his name on a statue is equivalent to a hateful organization completely destroying a monument.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    I never stated that I thought they were equivalent, either in magnitude or severity. You are putting words in my mouth.
    - msie 13y ago
      You could have worded it better then because I thought the same thing too.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        The fact that the two acts were not equivalent (which should be plain to see) does not mean that there are no parallels which can not be examined. Not all comparisons imply equivalence.
    - ceol 13y ago
      If you do not believe they are equivalent, then there was no point in asking if I would act the same way for both situations. I understand you were trying to show some sort of hypocrisy in my logic, but that isn't an argument in itself, and since, by your own admission, they are different situations, it's wrong to compare them in the first place.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        I believe that both situations have plenty of parrallels, but are not equivalent. Obviously blowing up multi-ton statues with explosives and graffiti are two very different activities in magnitude and severity. Nevertheless, they have many clear parallels. My objection is to your assertion that some people are allowed to express their objection to the art and some people are not. Many "westerners" who have never been in that hemisphere, nor have an particular interest in art, objected loudly to the dynamiting of those statues. Some of them did so anonymously on the internet. Is this okay because that act was more energetic, dramatic, and irreversible (the reason the two acts cannot be said to be equivalent)? Is it okay for another reason? (I don't know what standard you are using to determine if somebody is "self-righteous", so perhaps that is the difference to you?) Or perhaps do you think that it was not okay for "westerners" who didn't care about art to object to that act anonymously on the internet? These specific objections that you raised ("westerners", "anonymous", "don't care about the art anyway", "self-righteous") make much sense to me (you offered them with little to no justification), and I am trying to grok the extent to which you think they are valid.
bourne 13y ago
The outrage has an underlying racism? From what I read, the outrage isn't from the West; it's from other Chinese.
- ceol 13y ago
  Look at the comments on this random NBC News article. Then imagine them on every single article[0] about this story. The reddit thread[1] reached 3500 comments, and the top comments are all in the same vein: cries for punishment, stories about how awful Chinese tourists are, stories about how awful Chinese people in general are, etc. [0]: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=ding+jinhao https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&#3... [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/1f2l3x/a_chinese_kid_carved_his_name_on_the_wall_of_the/ http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/1f2l3x/a_chinese_kid_ca...
  - bourne 13y ago
    Well, then these types of comments are coming from both the East and the West, and it would be unfair to say that the comments from the West stem from a desire to hate a "faceless other" while the ones from the East are more legitimate somehow. The overboard comments from both sides are uncalled for.
    - ceol 13y ago
      Yes, you're right. I do think comments from both cultures are reprehensible, but the ones from other Chinese people do not seem to carry the same prejudice — at least from the translations I've read. You don't, for example, have other Chinese people calling the 15 year old boy "Ding Dong," as one of the NBC News commenters did.

by ceol 13y ago

jlgreco 13y ago

> None of these people really have any right to be upset; they didn't care about the artifact, they've probably never been to a museum, let alone done anything to help preserve these sorts of things. Would you say the same of everyone who was horrified by the dynamiting of the Buddhas of Bamiyan? I find your concept of "'right' to be upset" to be rather suspect.

ceol 13y ago
I would most certainly say the same to a bunch of anonymous, self-righteous Westerners crying for retribution in between parrotting disgusting stereotypes. But I'm not sure how you could think a child tourist scrawling his name on a statue is equivalent to a hateful organization completely destroying a monument.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  I never stated that I thought they were equivalent, either in magnitude or severity. You are putting words in my mouth.
  - msie 13y ago
    You could have worded it better then because I thought the same thing too.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      The fact that the two acts were not equivalent (which should be plain to see) does not mean that there are no parallels which can not be examined. Not all comparisons imply equivalence.
  - ceol 13y ago
    If you do not believe they are equivalent, then there was no point in asking if I would act the same way for both situations. I understand you were trying to show some sort of hypocrisy in my logic, but that isn't an argument in itself, and since, by your own admission, they are different situations, it's wrong to compare them in the first place.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      I believe that both situations have plenty of parrallels, but are not equivalent. Obviously blowing up multi-ton statues with explosives and graffiti are two very different activities in magnitude and severity. Nevertheless, they have many clear parallels. My objection is to your assertion that some people are allowed to express their objection to the art and some people are not. Many "westerners" who have never been in that hemisphere, nor have an particular interest in art, objected loudly to the dynamiting of those statues. Some of them did so anonymously on the internet. Is this okay because that act was more energetic, dramatic, and irreversible (the reason the two acts cannot be said to be equivalent)? Is it okay for another reason? (I don't know what standard you are using to determine if somebody is "self-righteous", so perhaps that is the difference to you?) Or perhaps do you think that it was not okay for "westerners" who didn't care about art to object to that act anonymously on the internet? These specific objections that you raised ("westerners", "anonymous", "don't care about the art anyway", "self-righteous") make much sense to me (you offered them with little to no justification), and I am trying to grok the extent to which you think they are valid.

bourne 13y ago

The outrage has an underlying racism? From what I read, the outrage isn't from the West; it's from other Chinese.

ceol 13y ago
Look at the comments on this random NBC News article. Then imagine them on every single article[0] about this story. The reddit thread[1] reached 3500 comments, and the top comments are all in the same vein: cries for punishment, stories about how awful Chinese tourists are, stories about how awful Chinese people in general are, etc. [0]: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=ding+jinhao https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&#3... [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/1f2l3x/a_chinese_kid_carved_his_name_on_the_wall_of_the/ http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/1f2l3x/a_chinese_kid_ca...
- bourne 13y ago
  Well, then these types of comments are coming from both the East and the West, and it would be unfair to say that the comments from the West stem from a desire to hate a "faceless other" while the ones from the East are more legitimate somehow. The overboard comments from both sides are uncalled for.
  - ceol 13y ago
    Yes, you're right. I do think comments from both cultures are reprehensible, but the ones from other Chinese people do not seem to carry the same prejudice — at least from the translations I've read. You don't, for example, have other Chinese people calling the 15 year old boy "Ding Dong," as one of the NBC News commenters did.