Minxin Pei – Understanding a colonized mind

This is a Chinese by ethnicity professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, US. She wrote an article titled “Why China should drop its slogan of ‘Asia for Asians’” in the editorial page of the ST on 5 Dec. She was obviously very offended by Xi Jinping’s called for ‘Asia for Asians’ as if it infringed on her mental freedom as a ‘westerner’, and thinking all good things must be western centric with the West as the centre of human civilization. She could not see her western biased agenda and thinking process. I will leave you to read her thrash but just to quote a few paragraphs to prove my point.
 
‘Some Chinese strategists believe the US is using Asian states particularly Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam, as pawns to contain China. If this perspective has prevailed at home, Chinese leaders, including Mr Xi, could have reached the fateful conclusion that, on balance, America’s security presence in Asia directly threatens Chinese interests and must be eliminated.
 
That would be a grave strategic error, based on a fundamental misreading of Asian security dynamics. Most of China’s neighbours, even North Korea, fear an unconstrained Chinese hegemon – and, if the US security presence were eliminated, that is precisely what they would face. ‘Asia for Asians’ would be ‘Asia for the Chinese’.’
 
From the above quote one can see how naïve is this professor. She does not believe that the US is using Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam to contain China. Of course she believes that this is not the case because the Americans told her so. She also believes that the American presence in Asia does not threaten Chinese interests. I am wondering is she a juvenile? Of course the Americans have been threatening Chinese interests since the Second World War with a series of containment policies and overt and covert threats to China’s interests and national security. She does not know that? My God!
 
Of course the American threat must be eliminated if you are a Chinese and managing China’s national interests. But for a banana thinking like a banana, China is the threat to America and must be contained but keep telling the Chinese to believe that the Americans are not doing anything to contain China. How silly can she be as a professor?
 
What about the perception of China as a hegemon? The Americans are the hegemon and still the hegemon. China is a rising power challenging the primacy of this hegemon but has yet to be a hegemon.
 
What cock is she talking about? Yes, many Afro Asians are thinking exactly what the West and the Americans are telling them, just like her, Americans are for peace and China is belligerent, hostile and a hegemon to be. After centuries of reading this kind of literature, even a naïve professor would have her brain cleansed and washed to think so. It must be.
 
It would take at least half a century for the Afro Asian minds to think that China could be and is a friendly power unlike the American Empire that is oppressing the whole world and threatening the whole world with wars and interventions. It is not easy to clean up the minds of unthinking masses subjected to the daily dosages of mind bending propaganda. Soak the mind with Dettol would not work either.
 
China would have to prove by words and deeds to its neighbours that it is a friendly power. It is doing that in Africa and Central Asia. It is doing so in South East Asia as well but not easy when the Americans are behind their thinkings. China is growing to be more assertive or is it the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan or Australia that are getting more assertive? As a hegemon, China would have kicked the asses of the Philippines and Vietnam and ran all over Japan and India. It does not do any of this stuff but restraining itself to diplomacy unless forced into a tight corner.
 
China is not a hegemon. There is no room for hegemon and empires in modern geopolitics. War is no longer an option to settle big power disputes. China is winning the war for influence by trade and economic policies. Not a single Chinese soldier is engaged in wars of domination and hegemony in any corner of the world. Whose soldiers are doing that, fighting wars and interfering in the domestic politics of independent states and nations and threatening regime change?
 
Only idiots are blind to see. A professor can also be an idiot, be blind to see the truth right before his or her very eyes.
 
PS. I should use the title ‘How to get a university education and still be stupid’.

Kopi Level - Green