Jackie Chan Says 'Chinese Need to Be Controlled'

Originally posted by teapot


Give society 100% freedom with no rules = chaos? How do you know? Show the historical society where this has occured! Provide proof that a society of rational adults making their own choices and decisions without influence of government has existed and proven to not work!

I can think of the worse case scenario, giving people 100% freedom, means no police or goverment control, this means that people can easily form their own groups, gangs without worrying about police and goverment controling them or stopping them.

Then we might end up much worst off right?

The world is a complicated place.

[edit on 19-4-2009 by _Phoenix_]

Originally posted by _Phoenix_

Then we might end up much worst off right?

The world is a complicated place.

[edit on 19-4-2009 by _Phoenix_]

Yes, 'might'! The world is indeed a complicated place, with many good and kind people in it. So, 'much worse off, right?', not necessarily. The common depiction of an anarchic world is of a world ruled by violent chaos. The point is, total freedom has not been 'tried' before. Every society, culture or civilisation I've ever heard of, had rules, laws, government. And as such, any assumption of how dangerous or good total freedom would be, is just that, an assumption.

Well I wrote three different emails to J.C’s staff asking for an explanation.
(Katharine Schroeder for one...etc).
We’ll see what I find in my email tomorrow.
I don’t expect and answer but that doesn’t mean I’ll stop trying with just a few emails.
Beat my head against the wall, maybe so, but, it’s my time isn’t it.

Time for me to turn in but first I’ll leave the note - I’m really surprised at how many people agree with J.C’s statement.
In fact I’m gobsmacked.
But I’ll have to address that tomorrow.

Night All...

In a way j.c. is right, just a bit deluded a biased perhaps due to debt or loyalty.

Some people do need to be controlled. Some people are leaders. And sometimes the people who need to be controlled somehow become the leaders, and the leaders become controlled.

This is where he is wrong, in my opinion. Nothing is absolute.

Democracy works.
If it's not working in China, that's not Democray's fault.
If it's not working in there it's probably because there are no entrepaneuer's in China. They are always to quick to steal someones else's idea as opposed to inventing something on their own so they deserve to be controlled.

What's wrong with Hong Kong? Their economy is booming, and it has nothing to do with their government like in the case of China (yes, I know it is part of China now, but the government keeps it's hands off)

Originally posted by Vyrtigo
In a way j.c. is right, just a bit deluded a biased perhaps due to debt or loyalty.

Some people do need to be controlled. Some people are leaders. And sometimes the people who need to be controlled somehow become the leaders, and the leaders become controlled.

This is where he is wrong, in my opinion. Nothing is absolute.

That's willing people following though, they have a choice to not follow, and to be their own leaders. That is a free choice, that is not control, because it's free will. When you have no choice but to follow blindly because society oppresses you to, then that's not freedom.

[edit on 19-4-2009 by yellowcard]

China Foreign Ministry recently said:
"We are not afraid of Internet, we manage it according to law."

This is the prevailing mentality at the top...."MANAGE/CONTROL".

Chinese people need NOT be controlled under dictatorship of communist party.
Break these NWO puppets down.

Free China.
Free Tibet.

reply to post by eventHorizon

Free China.
Free Tibet.

Control Hong Kong?
What about Controlling Tibet?
The second oldest culture on earth.
For more than 45 years living under Chinas oppressive murderous rule.
China kidnaps Tibetans most sacred living object - the Panchen Lama - a 6 year old child - The worlds youngest political prisoner, who’s been missing for over 12 years.



What about that Jackie?
I hope you follow up after the negative response to your statement by pulling your head out of a film can and watching one for once.
Or have you become so Westernized you’ve become adept at closing your eyes and turning your head away from anything unpleasant?



China’s continuing murder of Tibetan monks and the oppression and imprisonment of Tibet should not be glossed over or forgotten by any Eastern figurehead, most Westernized or no.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

FREE CHINA!
FREE TIBET!



[edit on 20-4-2009 by silo13]

Sounds like hypocrisy to me. Jackie Chan is a privileged resident. He gets to leave the country and make movies and watch them and read newspapers etc. Perhaps he was just gutless and feared recriminations from his government, but that is no excuse. He should have used his superstar status to effect some change. Or maybe that is how he really feels. Either way he just lost a fan.

USA embraces the same philosophy in nation level.
they always tend to use their military force to "control" the world community.

[edit on 20-4-2009 by gs001]

Wow!!! Everybody seems so upset at Jackie for saying what he said. That's not right to be mad at him. JC lives in China and knows the problems that the country faces. It wasn't too long ago that the US was so upset at China and the FDA for not controlling the safety and quality of the products from China. Lead in our children toys or poisons in the medication. Have you people forgotten these things? Now you're all mad at Jackie Chan for saying the same thing you have said in the past about the Chinese. That's just stupid. These problems didn't disappear just because we entered a war in the middle east. They didn't disappear because of 9-11. The problem only disappeared in your mind because of the war and 9-11. You people have an issue with what he said because you people have forgotten all about the reasons why he would say such things. Oh yeah, lets not forget about the North Korean missile test launch. I bet that's the thing that has you all up in arms. Just stop for a minute and think about it before you decide that Jackie Chan is suddenly this really bad person.

reply to post by mostlyspoons


Actually reply to post by mostlyspoons


Actually I don't think he has ever lived under or in a Communist society, and has always lived in a free and open society...he also lived in Australia for a while...

He's riled alot of feathers in the Chinese world - particularly in Hong Kong - with his comments, and there is a strong and growing Facebook group calling for him to be exiled to North Korea hehe

Anyway, he's come back now and said his comments were taken out of context, and he was talking about freedom in the entertainment arena only. Hmmmm.

news.bbc.co.uk...

After reading the whole thread I find most wish to jump on J.C. without ever having lived in either the mainland or Hong Kong. I have lived in both for years and there are pluses and minuses on both sides of the fence. Hong Kong, though it belongs to China, is not China in any way shape or form. However, morally it has declined since the Brits left and with the in flux of about 10,000 mainlanders a month its not getting any better.

The mainland could never get Hong Kong to go along with them no matter how much they sweet talked them. So they import mainlanders in the hope to one day over rule those that were native born in Hong Kong. The Brits tried the same with Scotland and Ireland but it didn't work. However here its a different story.

Jackie could also be referring to that also but since the majority here seem to think they know what he was saying and what he meant they will jump on the "down with J.C." band wagon.

Please, before you open your mouth and insert your foot, it helps if you talk with those who live there first.

If you really want to control the mainland, you will have to do so by education. The gov there has a serious problem because they are confronted with a growing middle class and they are simply a bicycle society with cars. Its like giving your 5 year old the keys to the SUV. They don't know what to do with it let alone how to take care of it.

Corruption goes all the way to the top and the cities are little kingdoms for the mayors. The provincial capitals can't control them and neither can the central gov. Thus you have a lack of control over the people in ways that is needed but excess control in ways that are detrimental on the whole. Otherwise known as improper response to changing situations and a Ben Franklin will improve your bargaining position.

Now back this type of system with 5000 years of history of doing the same thing. Good luck on changing it. Not going to happen for quite some time if ever. History repeats people, history repeats.

There is a need for control but in the proper and correct manor. Unfortunately 'proper and correct' isn't in their vocabulary. So give Jackie the benefit of the doubt before jumping to conclusions.

reply to post by pstrron


So, in defense of Jackie, you say the Chinese are morally bankrupt and have no choice but to be controlled in order to stop them from preying on their own people.

Wow, so sorry, Jackie Chan, for jumping to conclusions.

Ron, remind me not to hire you as a defense lawyer.



[edit on 21-4-2009 by TheComte]

reply to post by TheComte

Perhaps he was just gutless and feared recriminations from his government, but that is no excuse. He should have used his superstar status to effect some change. Or maybe that is how he really feels. Either way he just lost a fan.

Applaud...

So, in defense of Jackie, you say the Chinese are morally bankrupt and have no choice but to be controlled in order to stop them from preying on their own people.

Thank you both...

I’ve written more emails and made a few Skype phone calls. No reply yet from J.C (which I don’t expect) or a spokesperson (which I would hope to hear from)...

peace

My five cents for what its worth. I've a friend who served in Hong Kong for seven years up until 88. He knew Jackie quite intimately and only has good things to say about him. He is entitled to his opinion whatever that maybe. Before we judge him we should take a long look at our own society. Is democracy any better? As I understand it it came from the Greeks and the idea that the common man was incapable of making decisions for himself so therefore chosen elites would be offered up as a choice for the people to give them the illusion of choice. Sounds like not much has changed. Myself I lean toward anarchy and would like to see us at least try but there are many ways of coexisting, perhaps we should try them all. Having said all that perhaps he was taken out of context, we should all realise what journalists are like, hardly the bastions of truth now are they? I would like to know how people feel about the idea that the Lamas were not as benevolent as we are led to believe by the monk in the Gucci loathers and the Rolex watch. I've heard that life under them was a lot harder and dangerous than under China. Its something I've only just started to research so dont jump to the conclusion Im defending anyone but I've always been suspicious of the DL in his 5 star hotels and his $200+ ticket shows, not to mention his "How to enjoy your work" books, sounds like the sign written above the gates in a camp in WW2 Europe "work sets you free" dont you think?

Originally posted by SOXMIS
My five cents for what its worth. I've a friend who served in Hong Kong for seven years up until 88. He knew Jackie quite intimately and only has good things to say about him. He is entitled to his opinion whatever that maybe.

No offense but out of 7,008,900 people living in Hong Kong you just happen to know somebody who knows Jacki Chan that's sort of like me saying I know somebody who knows... Yadda Yadda blah blah blah


In case you may have forgotten or didn't realize this is a conspiracy site. The readers will require proof for these types of claims. Just a friendly heads up. Your credibility is on the line.

Before we judge him we should take a long look at our own society

Who exactly are you speaking for here? Aren't you the one who chose to live in China over where you lived before? If this true then shouldn't you be referring to the Chinese government now?

Myself I lean toward anarchy

Originally posted by SOXMIS
I would like to know how people feel about the idea that the Lamas were not as benevolent as we are led to believe by the monk in the Gucci loathers and the Rolex watch.

Now Now
Soxmis Don't be jealous. This thread was about "Jackie Chan Says 'Chinese Need to Be Controlled" But since you brought up the topic.

I've heard that life under them was a lot harder and dangerous than under China.

Its something I've only just started to research so dont jump to the conclusion Im defending anyone but I've always been suspicious of the DL in his 5 star hotels and his $200+ ticket shows, not to mention his "How to enjoy your work" books, sounds like the sign written above the gates in a camp in WW2 Europe "work sets you free" dont you think?

Great point
Everybody knows he would probably rather be Home back in Tibet instead of having to live in exile from his Homeland.

It's not surprising that you may not be able spell out his name. Some could get the feeling that you are being censored. Maybe that would require real freedom now wouldn't it? Those of us in the west know that Youtube has a lot of garbage on it but we also know that there are some very good informative videos. I'd post some very accurate and educational YouTube videos but oh yeah you wouldn't be able to watch them.

Yeah I would be in the dark to if that were the case.


[edit on 27-4-2009 by SLAYER69]

Now now Slayer, play nice. If I wanted to play up any contacts I would claim I knew him wouldnt I? I'm not saying there's no problems in China but I think its rather trite to go on about Tibet when America, UK and other members of the coalition of the willing are involved with the wholesale slaughter of innocent men, women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries around the world, I would suspect even in their own countries. I guess if my paradigm was made through videos from youtube as opposed to life experiance then I might feel the same as you, would it give me more credibility? I understand you want to bait me but to be frank Im not interested.

[edit on 27-4-2009 by SOXMIS]

Originally posted by SOXMIS
Now now Slayer, play nice. If I wanted to play up any contacts I would claim I knew him wouldnt I? I'm not saying there's no problems in China but I think its rather trite to go on about Tibet when America, UK and other members of the coalition of the willing are involved with the wholesale slaughter of innocent men, women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries around the world

Topic? jackie Chan Says 'Chinese Need to Be Controlled'
If one wants to use this as some sort of sounding board and push their misconceptions and versions of morality on others then so be, but one should also be prepared to have people push back wouldn't you agree?

I understand you want to bait me but to be frank Im not interested.

Baiting?

I'm sorry who brought up the Dali Lama in the first place? May I suggest a reading comprehension course? Then read back through your own post again. Then ask yourself who was baiting.

The Topic? I'll refresh your memory apparently it's lacking or were you just tired?

jackie Chan Says 'Chinese Need to Be Controlled

It says nothing about the Dalli Lama,Iraq or Afghanistan. Did you forget who changed the subject originally? Maybe just a temporary lapse in concentration.



[edit on 28-4-2009 by SLAYER69]

I was asked by the OP to post my comment on his thread. If there is a problem with that comment then I'll leave it to him to redress it. If I've stepped outside the bounds of the forum then I'll leave it to the moderators to address me. If you don't want want to consider my opinions that's fine by me but please let me remind you that a forum is for debate. It is not a court of law where evidence is required, it is not an individuals playground where they can take out their frustrations on people in the safety of their homes, it is a sounding board where you can express your opinions and others can agree or debate with you if they disagree. I think we got off on the wrong foot here chap and I'm hoping we can move past it.

[edit on 30-4-2009 by SOXMIS]