Sauna Dialogue, Common Sense Politics

Cheung Lap's piece in the 28 September 2009 issue of Hong Kong Economic Journal is, as usual, interesting and thought provoking. Chojiro has taken the liberty to translate it below.


Departures from common sense are usually not trustworthy. This probably applies from title cons to national affairs.

The following conversation took place in a sauna room. A teammate and reader asked, "Why do you say Tibet Independence is a fake agenda? Isn't the Dalai Lama red hot in the West? Doesn't he have a lot of influence and followers?"

"If a person has left Hong Kong for 50 years and never once returned to Hong Kong during that period, would you believe him if he says he has a lot of influence in Hong Kong?"

"Of course not! That's exaggerating!"

"So is the Dalai Lama."

"How is the Dalai Lama's influence compared to Mao Zedong's?"

"Mao passed away in 1976. In the 33 years since then China has had two new generations and there have been profound changes socially and in reality. The times are different. Mao cannot do much even if he resurrects, not to mention Dalai."

"I see what you mean, now that you've explained it."

"It's nothing more than reasoning by common sense."

Another person in the sauna room interjected, "Lee Ka-shing would be a goner if he has left Cheung Kong for 50 years." "The Brits have left Hong Kong for 12 years. They are goners too," he added.

That's why Dalai's representatives are day dreaming when they went to Beijing to negotiate for resuming their administration in Tibet and to include Tibetan districts within Sichuan and Qinghai in 'Greater Tibet'."

In fact Dalai knows that this is impossible. But he has no control over his own destiny. Why? Dalai has many subordinates and followers who rely on him to be fed. If the boss wants you to say so, can you not say it? Who's the "boss"? "The guy who pays is the boss."

"Dalai runs a government-in-exile in India. Rents, salaries, transportation and lodging expenses have to be paid. The cost is at least US$20 to $30 million a year. Multiply this cost by 50 years. Who has been paying for it?"

Politics is complicated but also very simple. You see it through once you trace where the money comes from.

The insiders are absolutely clear about the situation. The outsiders are being fooled. People like Richard Gere think they are being very righteous. They are actually fools.

The bull shit is over.

Competing for World Power

Cheung Lap had another excellent piece in his HKEJ column on 19 March 2009:

Since Zheng He (鄭和) [Note] began his seven expeditions to the Western Seas in 1431, China has never dispatched any forces to the distant oceans apart from making courtesy calls. 578 years later, in 2009, the Chinese Navy sent a small fleet comprising three vessels to the Indian Ocean to protect Chinese merchant ships in the Gulf of Aden. This is China’s first step in its march to the distant oceans.

This matter has historic meaning because hitherto the historical and reality perspective of the Chinese elites is “competing for power in the Central Plains”. They have never thought of reaching out from China to the world. Even the concept of “exporting revolution” in the Mao era did not actually gain any foothold overseas; and the focus was merely on “exporting”. After 2000, however, the perception in China started to change. It began reaching out to the world and had put idea into action.

There have been many “emigrants” from China since the Ming Dynasty. Poor farmers along the coast moved to South East Asia and the whole world for survival or to escape persecution. With a total population of close to 100 million, they have established roots locally and are known as “Overseas Chinese” around the world.

In the long stream of history, Chinese competition strategy revolves around resources and interests on the Chinese continent. But in the last 10 years there has been an important conceptual change among the elite class in Beijing and even the general population. It reckons that the survival and fate of China are already highly dependent on the global market and its resources. The national security of China is beyond the concept of defending national territories and the border.

More than 10 years ago, the elites in Beijing have talked about the Strait of Malacca and suggested constructing a canal in southern Thailand. It was a fresh concept among a few people at that time. Now such talks are all over town.

When there were boycotts for the problem in Darfur, Sudan, some perplexed friends asked, “What’s the matter?” Beijing establishing points in Africa has touched the interests of old empires such as Britain and France. These countries have suddenly realized the seriousness of the problem, and that Beijing, working hard to cultivate Africa, is not ruling out the emergence of “Chinese Immigrant Cities” in Africa according to Chinese metropolitan management models. Population is China’s biggest problem but it is also China’s most horrible strength. The rumour that certain countries in the east coast of Africa tend to systematically accept Chinese investment and immigration really touches the nerve of European and American countries. Exporting population is more horrible than exporting revolution.

[Note] Those who are interested in Zheng He (鄭和) and his seven expeditions to the Western Seas can visit http://melaka101.googlepages.com/chengho.htm.

Nature - The Way of the Tao

Cheung Lap had the following article in his Hong Kong Economic Journal column on 25 February 2009.

When the pendulum swings right, it embodies and saves energy to swing to the left. At the highest point in the right, it turns toward the left. It does the same in the left and finally settles in the middle.

Let’s look at breathing. When we breathe in, we embody and save energy to breathe out. When we breathe in to the maximum, we breathe out. The Buddhists say when we breathe in and breathe out, we include the whole world.

Why do the Taoists, the Buddhists and the Confucians interpret the law of “opposite and complementary” from different angles? It is because the person who tries to attain religious virtue understands this rule of the universe through self practice. If the solar system has the process of “formation, solidification, corruption and destruction”, and the earth’s climate has “spring, summer, autumn and winter”, then how can an individual, a race, an empire … escape this rule?

At its peak in the 19^th Century, the British Empire was described as the empire where the sun never set. At the end, the sun set. Upon the collapse of the empire of the Soviet Union in the 1990’s, everyone thought that the pendulum of socialism had ended. Little did we know that when the United States became the single most powerful nation that could not be struck, it struck itself and the pendulum of history swung to the opposite direction.

An opposite force is hidden in any kind of force. Many people laugh at the middle way, considering it a useless, regressive philosophy. Little do they know that the vision of the wise men in the past surpassed victory or defeat and extremism, and was a thinking that transcended humanism. If there are reasons for a tree to exist for a hundred years, how can a race that has persevered for a few thousand years, died but is not dead, have nothing outstanding?

In the hundred odd years since the Opium War, the Chinese were struck to the point of silliness. They learned from the Communists and the West, tried this and tried that, until they discovered that the most practicable way was the way of their ancestors.

The Chinese Communist Party got its breath of life only when it returned to Chinese culture. This was the basis of Deng Xiaoping’s reform and opening. Get rid of any form, destroy any stubbornness, return to the natural state of things and follow “nature, the way of the Tao”. This is the core thinking of the Tao Te Ching.

Ye Mingchen (葉名琛) and Taiwan Politicians

Here is Chojiro's translation of Cheung Lap’s article published on 18 February 2009.

Ye Mingchen was Governor of Guangdong (廣東) and Guangxi (廣西) at the time of the Second Opium War. When the British army approached the city of Guangzhou (廣州), Ye asked for fortune from the mythical Taoist god Lǚ Dòngbīn (呂洞賓, also known as 呂祖) using the Fuji (扶乩) method. He was instructed to place on the wall of the city chamber pots, which could defend against the British cannons. There is no need to ask about the result, and this has become a big joke in contemporary history. People like Ye could be Governor of Guangdong and Guangxi. The Qing Dynasty was corrupt to the bone. Rather, the farmers from 108 villages in Sanyuanli (三元里) inflicted considerable losses on the British forces using primitive weapons.

Ye Mingchen was superstitious. He believed that “the Brits would withdraw in a hundred days.” In defense of Guangzhou, he proposed the “six nots”: “he would not fight, not make peace and not defend; he would not die, not capitulate and not run away.” The city of Guangzhou fell within hours.

Ye made me think of the politicians in Taiwan. The historical background and circumstances are different, but these people make me laugh all the same. Take Mr Bian. He did not declare independence for Taiwan when he was president and wielded power for eight years. However, he trumpets the concept of Taiwan independence when he is imprisoned and cannot even exit the front door. As an ordinary citizen, I really fail to understand. It is as if a person remains single while at home but wants to get married and have a child when he has shaved his head and become a monk. People will think you are crazy.

Also President Ma Yingjeou. When I read about Ye’s six nots, I immediately thought of Ma’s policy of “no unification, no independence and no war.” How similar.

When the British forces were outside the city and about to attack, there were only four choices: “fight, make peace, surrender or run.” There were no options such as “not fight, not make peace and not defend.” For today’s Taiwan, you either unify or separate. There is no middle way. As a political leader, if you don’t set the direction and only talk about a holding position, you are merely presiding over a side government, letting the days go by and be marginalized.

The fact Mr Bian grabbed money when he was president and publicized ideals when he became a prisoner shows that Taiwan independence is a “false agenda”.

Naturally, senior Qing official Ye Mingchen was defeated easily when he replaced defense with Fuji in front of a strong enemy. For Taiwan today, people in and out of government talk rubbish. When there is really a war, it could be like Ye Mingchen defending Guangzhou.