Why is the US media so afraid of Chinese words?

Daniel A Bell, the China professor at Tsinghua University, had a golden opportunity, I claim, to break through the wall of ignorance about China and to inform the US public, which still believes that learning a foreign language is a character flaw, or even a job killer, about the most important Chinese key terminologies in political theory. You know. The names the Chinese gave to their political ideas, movements, and brands.

But no! This is The New York Times. In here we use clean and pure English, the only language that matters in the world.

If you disagree, well, you won't get published. Not in journals, not in magazines, and certainly not in The New York Times which practices Orwellian Rules of Writing -meaning that its writers will avoid foreign words and find English replacement for them.

Remember the stories from the old days in America when colored people were not supposed to sit in a public bus together with whites because it looked so unpleasant to the white man's eyes?  Well, same with words: if they are foreign, that means they also look unpleasant to the white man's eyes. No differences. Same prejudices.

I love it when stupid Americans tell me that New York is so multicultural, when in fact it is full of Americans. America may have fought for racial equality, but they are intolerant toward those foreign terms. Avoid foreign words. Write English.

Imagine an op-ed article in The Times sprinkled with Hexie Shehui, Si Ge Quan Mian, or Zhongguo Meng. Those editors would feel insulted. Do you expect us to look this shit up in a dictionary? Yes, because it is Chinese. But I don't know Chinese. Exactly. So keep that in mind when writing a piece on a people who don't quite yet understand. Otherwise, if he simple used English words for Chinese ideas, the piece would read like the usual NY Times report: talking down on them as if a viceroy explaing

Isn't the world insulting to Americans? All those crazy languages. And we forbid them in our classrooms, papers, publishers, and academia. No big deal. If you have a great idea, I will find an appropriate English name for it. This will make it easier for me to define your idea for our audiences. Yes, I stole your idea, basically. But, hey, there's no such things as intellectual property theft in China, right? Anyway, we Westerners do this for the last 350 years: translating Chinese words into what we already know.
No wonder that nobody in American wants to study a foreign language any more. It's like a handicap in the professional world. Yes, you can talk to Chinese in the streets, but not use Chinese words in your writing career. It's worse than racism.

What's the point if you learn Chinese but will never be given the opportunity to use it, as all major Western schools, media, publishers, and universities practice Orwellian Rules of Writings in order to keep their China reports "Chinese-free" - pure, clean, and unpolluted?

The New York Times, a US corporation dressed as global public service, is perhaps the most notorious offender to the world's languages, cultures, and foreign people. All its writers and editors, letting alone outside contributors, are forced to "avoid foreign words" whenever they can in order to keep the sovereignty over the definition of thought. It's like saying to Russian, Iranian, German, Indian writers and thinkers: you may express your ideas but it must be in OUR VOCABULARIES, thereby effectively committing cultural intellectual property theft. It's the old imperial codex of "It's knowledge only if we know it" -meaning in practice that unless a Westerner said it and named it, as far as our media and the academia are concerned, foreigners have no ideas, concepts, and categories. Certainly no ideas, concepts, and categories that are worth reporting by their correct names.

Here's another gem of violent 'language imperialism' by a 'China professor', Daniel A. Bell, who in order to get published in The New York Times prostrates himself not only to Western values but also to the NY Times racial language policy to omitting the correct Chinese terms and names, thus keeping his China report purposely "Chinese-free".

If I was a student of Dr Bell at Tsinghua University, I would ask myself "what's the point of studying Chinese when the heights in my future career as a China Expert will be directly proportioned to me not having to write Chinese words at all. As a commentator on Nazi propaganda during the Third Reich once observed: People, if it looks like propaganda, that's because it is propaganda. It's one thing to forbid yellow people riding a public bus, and a similar thing to forbid them their words, names, and brands.

I am all for inclusion of foreign cultures -their originality, ideas, and inventions- into World History.

The New York Times, which conspired in most US wars during its long history, and which promotes US Empire and Americanization throughout the world (of which brutal Anglophone language policies are an essential part) thinks that white Western men and their white vocabulary policies and Orwellian rules of writing should dictate what US citizens read and hear about foreign lands.

Daniel A. Bell had a golden opportunity, I claim, to break through the walls of media racism and ignorance and inform the US public and those Anglophone wankers in Asia who refuse to learn the local languages because their media implies them not to, about certain Chinese key terminologies that are essential to understand China and to honor and respect its ideas, its culture, and its thought. But no, Dr Bell bowed down to Empire. Think about this for a moment: A China Expert on China writes a China piece without using a single Chinese term! 

I felt like watching tortured Peeta Mellark in the Hunger Games confessing on the nation's First propaganda channel that all resistance to Empire was futile and that the revolution must stop. No Chinese words when you explain Chinese ideas to us! We are the masters. It is the Chinese who have to learn English. Hundreds of his students must feel betrayed and let down by this Dr Bell: "Fuck you China. Fuck you Tsinghua University. In the end, the West will rule here anyway, so you better forget your culture and language and do it like I professor do: write Chinese-free China op-eds for the NY Times!" 

No wonder that American students don't want to study foreign languages any more. They won't be allowed to use foreign words anyway later in their professional careers in the media and writing business. America may say all it wants about how it battled slavery and racism - violent culturism is still in full swing.

During the last 350 years of Western China Studies, most 'China Experts' agreed that China has no originality, no intellect, and no reason. That is because they never allowed or permitted Chinese ideas, brands, and thought to exists in Western media, papers, and textbooks. There was always some lazy and convenient Western translation. Incorrect? Sure. Misleading? Always. But it helped the West to expand its control over Eastern thought, with the result that even today Asians will have to study their own Asian cultures in Western universities. The other side of the coin is that white Western masters in Asia can live as gods -as long as they play their part and assimilate and adjust as little as possible to China and the Chinese language. They day Westerners use Chinese terminologies in their China reports, is the day Westerners will have to come to China, the original place and the owner of the intellectual property so to speak. And that day all those Western 'China Experts' will lose prestige and status. 

We can know what they think by applying our own Western categories and concepts to it. It's the same easy-peasy formula that helped the Western powers dominate Asia during the ages of colonialism. In fact, the NY Times has not evolved a bit since then in its treatment of foreign words: out and away with foreign pollution.

A China without Chinese. That's what Washington wants to hear. That's what Western corporations and think tanks what to hear. That's what Western universities want to hear. China is supposed to completely 'Westernize'. The less we have to deal with Chinese elements in our lives the better. Certainly, if we can censor all Chinese words in US publications, that will help a great deal in keeping those non-Western people and their ideas out of our heads.

Is the omission of Chinese words and concepts "correct scholarship"? No. Is it the "correct names"? No. What is it? It is bullshit. It is patronizing educated US readers who, I claim, wouldn't mind to look up a foreign term they didn't know, or even to study a foreign concept just a little more. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the problem is with the self-absorbed, political motivated, and agenda-driving NY Times journalists, editors, and owners who feel shamed and intimidated by people telling them about foreign cultures, things that they had no way of knowing about before. This would greatly offend their egos, and rob them of all their pretensions as intellectual giants (the arrogance and self-importance of NY Times people is legendary). They must write their reports on foreign lands from a position of the highest authority, like galactic overseers and masters of the universe. Chinese (or any other foreign terms) would make them look tiny and little and non-experts on things that are clearly not their territory. Therefore, writing from that position of the highest authority would make them look what? Stupid and preposterous. They just can't have that. They must never give away their privileges of censoring and omitting inconvenient foreign words. A cheap English translation will do the trick all the time.

I know for sure that one day, after this current Cult of China Experts is long gone, and a new generation of tolerant, broad-minded, and honest scholars and journalists is emerging that will be able to put an end to the constant NY Times's misreporting on Chinese policies. This new generation of scholars and journalists will fight and hopeful limit or destroy the unfair use of bogus English translations just to get published. The will fight the inequality of words and vocabularies like we fought the inequalities of the races and genders. But, most importantly, the new generation of China scholars and journalists will enlightening the world community about the US media's unfair treatment of China (and most non-Western nations really) that poisoned the wells and crept the rats out of pan-America.

Down with English translations of Chinese key terminologies!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffT_eaVhqUA

@NYtimes BUSTED Daniel A Bell #censored #westernvalues

Thorsten J. Pattberg‏@TJPattberg

@NYtimes BUSTED #racism #China hi @comradewong @chubailiang https://youtu.be/ffT_eaVhqUA  via @YouTube @NYTFriedman

Racism and Anti-China Policies at The New York Times

“Your students, Professor Bell, are all secretly reading Dr. Pattberg‘s essays on the liberalization of Chinese terminologies.” 

Daniel A. Bell, a professor of “political theory” (which really is the theory of power relations) at China’s Tsinghua University, is NOT helping correct scholarship, I claim, by prostrating himself before The New York Times‘s ‘Orwellian Rules of Writing’, and by (repeatedly)submitting China op-eds that are virtually, I mean linguistically and culturally, “Chinese-free”. {GO TO VIDEO}

Pattberg: O culto aos 'especialistas em China' (Pravda.RU)

PEQUIM - Há alguns anos, encontrei um alemão, em Harvard, que se vangloriava do próprio 'engajamento' na luta política, de uma palestra que daria em New York City, de como trabalhava duro a favor da liberdade para o Tibete e sanções contra a China. Que não havia direitos humanos na China - ensinou-me ele. Fiquei impressionadíssimo. Alertei-o para que não fizesse nada daquilo contra o nosso governo alemão, porque poderia ser condenado por traição. O homem balançou a cabeça com ar de profundo desprezo pela minha falta de fé democrática. 

Não é o único. Há um culto a intelectuais evangelizadores anti-China, no Ocidente, aqueles arrogantes cruzados determinados a construir golpes nas mais diferentes nações não ocidentais e usurpar quaisquer governos democráticos. 

Sobre a China, agem e falam como se estivessem acima da lei. Isso, porque entendem que o governo chinês seria corrupto, não eleito e comunista, vale dizer, ilegítimo. Assim sendo, por que alguém teria de respeitar o que a China faz, defende ou propõe? Além do mais, esses intelectuais evangelizadores pró-ocidente acham que ocidentais podem fazer o que bem entendam contra a China, porque os EUA comandam todo o aparelho de comunicação-propaganda 'midiática', o que sempre os salvará de qualquer dificuldade, caso haja. 

Os tais ditos 'especialistas' em China são hoje uma força política que faz oposição direta ao Partido Comunista. Formam ninhos e redes, com hierarquia muito forte e rígido código de ética: todos se autoelogiam uns os outros, 'retuítam' tuítes uns dos outros, fazem propaganda dos livros uns dos outros, e castigam furiosamente todos os 'traidores', que chamam de "elogiadores da China". 

Quando Yang Rui, âncora de um noticiário na rede CCTV, condenou as atividades de estrangeiros em Pequim, foi vítima de assassinato de reputação e, na sequência, mostrado por 'especialistas em China', em todo o ocidente, como exemplo do que acontece a quem se atreva a defender a China. 

No ocidente, grupos extremistas estrangeiros, de direita ou de esquerda, são atentamente monitorados e controlados. Mas que ninguém se atreva a controlar os imperialistas ocidentais. Alemães financiam separatistas chineses em Xinjiang; norte-americanos financiam separatistas no Tibete. Empresas da imprensa norte-americana até deslocam seus 'militantes' para Hong Kong, decididas a derrubar Xi Jinping, o presidente, a mulher dele e toda sua família. [...]

[CONTINUE AT PRAVDA.RU]

Pattberg: 西媒都是垃圾

西媒都是垃圾:

Pattberg on Orwellian Rules of Writing in the Western World

OvOvOvO1:

US media are desperate because most were kicked out of the Chinese mainland market. Now they are sitting in Hong Kong, complaining all the time and spitting their poison. They have no Chinese language skills north of kindergarten. They become English teachers or reporters. In teaching and reporting, their ego explodes. In their minds and writings they act as if the masters of the universe. But we in Hong Kong just call them this: "white trash".

WATCH: WESTERN MEDIA IS FULL OF SHIT [VIDEO]

裴德思怎么看：对不起美国：中国不会崩溃

裴德思怎么看：对不起美国：中国不会崩溃

裴德思：陈定定先生，礼貌、温顺和口才根本没用。你对沈大伟的回复发人深省，让我想起1922年辜鸿铭向明恩溥解释为什么西方没有真正理解中国人的原因。接下来的事你也知道，中国被丢进了臭水沟。这是因为‘和平崛起'并不是中国能决定的。我曾经太多次和中国学者解释，西方根本不在乎你们怎么想，不管那是不是真的。学术，事实上，全球史并不是由事实组成的，而是由幸存者编造的。中国学者要么被‘西化'，要么被无视、边缘化；或者，如果他们惹麻烦的话，被放逐。事实上，中国并不是唯一的受害者。我希望这一点能给你们一点安慰。非西方国家、政府和他们的人民没有什么能做的，尽管大部分的人还在试图取悦西方国家。事实就是，这和他们的所作所为毫无关系，他们作为非西方国家的存在，是他们的政府和人民遭受歧视、强迫和攻击的最重要原因。
Source： http://www.ltaaa.com/wtfy/16026.html

裴德思怎么看中国式的圣诞节概念

北京：知道孔子的人很少，不是说不知道他是谁，而是说不知道他做了什么。这个古代的老师有很多名字，如大成至圣文宣王、大师、孔夫子等。但是和基督教圣经中的圣诞老人尼古拉斯（Nicholas）或者（Santa Claus）不同，孔子不是基督教圣人而是中国圣人，更确切地说，孔子是圣人。

儒家的圣人（有数百位之多）就像佛教的佛一样与欧洲特征格格不入的。他们培育塑造理想的人格，成为以家庭为基础的中国价值观传统中的最高成员，圣人拥有最高的道德标准，即德，他们使用仁义礼智信的原则把所有人都当作大家庭的一员。

但是，即使在中国，也只有少数学者被称为“圣人”。这是因为这个词和概念被小心翼翼地从思想史中挪走了。对17世纪和此后的西方传教士来说，孔子被错误地当成基督教的神一样崇拜，因而是就像西方的圣徒杰罗姆（Saint Jerome）或本笃（Saint Benedict）一样的真正的“圣徒”。

1688年，蓝登尔·泰勒（Randal Taylor）写到“中国的起源并不是在大洪水之后不久，虽然如此，我们依然得出中国第一代居民很可能真正了解上帝和创世说的结论。”这是将中国完全基督教化的开始。时至今日，北京依然生活在2012年（西方人的耶稣基督纪年），中国人仍然庆祝圣诞节。与此相反，欧洲人中有谁知道今年是孔子诞辰2563年周年呢？

http://www.paigu.com/a/620936/27949226.html

译自：A Confucian Christmas in China By Thorsten Pattberg

作者简介：

裴德思（Pattberg, Thorsten）、德国籍、男、1977年生、语言学者以及作家，北京大学高等人文研究院研究人员。北京大学文学博士。专攻中西方比较文化与语言文学。2007年毕业于爱丁堡大学东亚研究院，取得硕士学位。2007年考入北京大学博士研究生、2008年赴东京大学史料编纂所访学研究、2010年赴哈佛大学梵文和印度学系访学研究，2012年1月北京大学外语学院世界文学研究所博士研究生毕业，取得博士学位，博士论文题为《德国语境中的中国圣人概念》。

Politeness, meekness, and eloquence won't help, Chen Dingding

Thorsten J. Pattberg

Politeness, meekness, and eloquence won't help, Chen Dingding. Your thoughtful response to David Shambaugh reminds me about Gu Hongming's 1922 genius attempt to explain to Sir Arthur Smith why the West was wrong about China. Next thing you know China lies in the gutters. That's because "a peaceful rise" is not China to decide. I say this a thousand times to Chinese scholars that nobody in the West cares what you think. Not even if its the truth. Scholarship, in fact, the history of the world, is not a string of truths, but a chronology of survivors. Chinese scholars either "westernize" or they will be ignored, marginalized, or, if they caused trouble, ostracized. You may take comfort in the fact that China isn't the only victim. There's nothing that those non-Western nations, governments, and their people can do; although, of course, most are still trying to please. The reality is, it never was about what they did or do; their mere presence (or shall we say "existence") as non-Western nations, governments, and people was (and always will be) the single most important factor as to why they were routinely patronized, coerced, and, if need be, attacked. 

Comment on Chen Dingding's "Sorry America, China is NOT going to collapse", National Interest

裴德思说：中华思想文化核心词不需要英文翻译

学者裴德思说：术语的“中文版”释义出炉之后，就到了翻译家们施展才调的时候。专家委员会、中国翻译协会副会长陈明明坦言，“中华思惟文化术语重视包涵性，良多术语只可领悟，不成言传，并且学术强，翻译难度可想而知。”为此，专家们都秉承一个准绳：面临，既不克不及太学术，又不克不及太简单。英文要合适中文本意，也要重视可读性，用语必然要地道。[。。。]

http://www.chengyuepump.cn/yingyonglingyu/361.html

Salary and Living in Beijing

裴德思: 但大部分中国人若与身处的社会割裂，并不会得到什么好处

中国教育部部长袁贵仁最近指出，应加强管控那些宣扬所谓“西方价值观”的教科书，其言论随即受到西方的“中国问题专家”嘲讽。

禁止学校传授创世论等假科学理论或危险教派的教义，并不完全属于审查。喔不，等一下──在美国，这显然是属于审查。“西方价值观”是凭空捏造的教条，过时又危险。譬如说民主。

民主由古希腊人所创，其好处被大大高估。首先，民主在古希腊并非行之有效。当地首批哲学家都是法西斯主义者，即使在2500年后的今天，这个“西方文明的摇篮”的国力仍然不逮。古罗马君主和一个复仇心重、专制独裁的上帝，才是欧洲致胜之道。

[...] （翻译/Alison Yeung；编审/Nelson Cheng）

[Guancha.cn]

Does ambassador Michael Clauss read Dr. Pattberg's essays?

BEIJING - I don't think that Mr Michael Clauss has read my two recent articles on Sino-Western relations here, and here while in Hong Kong last week. But I surely have another bold and thought-provoking piece about the casus 'Zhang Miao and Angela Köckritz' up my sleeves for Beijing. Should be good in a week or so. Stay tuned in...

"I think I see it better now after some reflection. Mr Clauss pressed Beijing on that poor Zhang Miao and Beijing lost its temper, reached out for the first biddable German and dictated a stream of hate and spite that we had to endure in yesterday's paper under the byline of Thorsten Pattberg, knowing Mr Clauss would be in Hong Kong to read it. This, despite revolting us as ordinary readers, succeeded in its main goal of destabilizing German foreign policy and extracting this craven interview. Western diplomats and leaders are going to need to learn to be stronger than that." 

Comment by ehoprice on South China Morning Post: 

Settle wartime grievances German ambassador to China urges Beijing, Tokyo

12 Years in China (R-rated)

TWELVE YEARS ago, I arrived in China with the determination to study first Sanskrit and Buddhism and then, expediently, the indigenous Chinese traditions such as Taoism and Confucianism. Plagued by precarious living conditions and academic poverty all around us (especially in the Chinese humanities), let alone constant Western media prejudices against China, we managed, largely because of our curiosity, discipline, frugality, and our bristling youth, not only to survive but also to make small careers of it. Overall fine memories of an extraordinary experience:

SHANGHAI - It's been a full zodiac circle. Twelve years ago in the Year of the Sheep 2003, I landed in China and I must confess that I knew nothing about the Chinese zodiac. 

In my country, Germany, we were taught little about the East, except that it was our cultural and ideological adversary. And where I attended university, in Edinburgh … boy, did the British entertain prejudices against mainland China. 

Registered as a Russian major at Fudan University in Shanghai, a metropolis of 20 million people, I found a small room near Wujiaochang crossings, only a 1 yuan (then worth about 12 US cents) bus ride down Siping Lu, passing Tongji University, to the famous tourist spot "The Bund" opposite Pudong. The very day of settling in town I bargained a gregarious Holland bike that was stolen barely 20 minutes later when I checked into a local store for bread and a glass of rancid nutella (chocolate spread) which, as if teaching a painful lesson in humility, caused the first and still most hideous food poisoning in my life. 

[Read full text at ASIA TIMES]

Zhongguomeng and Wenming (Do not translate Chinese key terminologies)

The Zhongguomeng is about the the great rejuvenation of the Chinese "Wenming"... the spiritual civilization.

中国与哈佛

日本《外交学者》7月31日文章,原题:中国对常春藤联盟的恋情 不投资本国高等教育,中国将无法缓和人才向西方大学“流失”的趋势。中国学子对哈佛大学趋之若鹜,并非秘密。正如体坛精英加入顶尖俱乐部,中国的年轻才俊也被名牌大学所吸引。如今外国顶尖大学也正以前所未有的规模吸引中国尖子生。 这并非仅限于哈佛。无论是加州大学伯克利分校、耶鲁还是剑桥,一流学府都充满中国的年轻才俊。对个人这是好事,但其黑暗面就是国家的人才流失。 最新证据源自中国富豪潘石屹夫妇对哈佛的巨额捐款。这本非什么稀罕事,却在中国社交媒体上引发众怒。作为商人,潘氏夫妇或许期盼其“投资”获得某种形式的回报,除了让企业扬名立万,或许还能把自家亲朋好友送进哈佛。鉴于照顾家庭和朋友是儒家传统根深蒂固的组成部分,大多数中国人对此并无异议。其实若拥有相应财富,许多批评者可能也会这么做。但人们关注的是:他们为何不投资中国教育? 在数学、阅读和科学技巧等方面,中国学生(普遍)表现得更优异,这点众所周知。那中国的大学为何无法跻身世界前列? 北京正竭力扭转中国的人才流失趋势。例如,作为培养“未来世界领袖”倡议的一部分,清华吸引了美国施瓦茨曼集团捐赠3亿美元,北大聘请哈佛大学燕京学社前社长…… 中国需要拥有本国的哈佛(及耶鲁、普林斯顿等)。这完全可以理解。中国学生具有积极进取的冲劲和竞争优势(这些因素正推动他们在全世界取得成功)。然而,只要中国精英不相信自己的文明,并将财富投向别国的教育事业,唯有奇迹才能把中国从历史的沉睡中唤醒。(作者裴德思,王会聪译)来源环球时报)
Source: http://www.fkjwm.com/banliliucheng/1365.html

美国发动了178场战争和武装侵略，堪称是个经验丰富的老牌帝国主义国家

中国日前划定了新的东海防空识别区，作为回敬，美国在没有通告的情况下派出了不速之客——两架B52轰炸机前往该区域，似乎丝毫未顾及中国国防部的颜面。

　　深海原油和民族精神

　　飞行所经过的地点正是争议的中心——钓鱼岛/尖阁诸岛，这是海上一块无人居住的荒芜小岛，中日两国都宣称拥有对该岛的主权。一些经济学者认为，两国争这块岛是为了附近的深海石油，但实际上，中日的这场争夺战更有民族精神的原因在里面。那么，究竟哪一方是对的呢？
　　事件的开端，首先要追溯到东京在去年搞的“国有化”事件。在日本方面扬言要从私人手里购买岛屿之后，此前一直保持克制，坚持“搁置争议”的中国政府迅速做出了反击——中国爆发了一场反日活动，其规模堪称是小泉在2012参拜经过神社后最大。照实说，其实那个岛屿本身不值几个钱——问题是岛屿周围的海域：这片海域是中国东部通往太平洋的走廊，而日本的目的正在于控制这条走廊。

　　
B52轰炸机——一拿来吓人的钢铁大块头

　　这里就不得不提到另一个国家，美国。美国现在还占领着日本，在冲绳等地拥有将近5万驻军。如今发生了这种事，美国政府就觉得，要是再不出来露一手，好教他在东亚和南亚的半殖民地兼卫星国知道咱还是世界最强国家，那就说不过去了。
　
　　可以预见的是，未来任何有关防空领域的事件，不管多么鸡毛蒜皮，都会令美国有派飞机耀武扬威的冲动。（巴基斯坦和伊朗不就老有美国无人机出入吗）如果不派无人机了，那更可怕的玩意——轰炸机就要来了。日本到现在估计还记得老式的B29，当年就是这种轰炸机在广岛和长崎丢下了两颗蛋蛋。
　　所以说，这件事哪天发展成网络上的一个梗也是不奇怪的：为了西Z和X疆的抗议而派飞机？算了吧，还是为了欢庆圣诞派飞机比较有价值。

　　中国VS美国

　　归根结底，这一切的闹剧都是为了什么？首先我们要明白一件事，根据当今大多数分析家的预测，中国会在十年左右的时间里取代美国成为全球经济老大。绝不能小看了这种变化——失业、失去地位和自信心也就是这样了。一些人甚至还认为，美帝国近年的电影总是各种爆炸，总的来看，好莱坞似乎也开始走下坡路了。
　　美国本来一直是主角，这下被编导撸成了配角（中国现在成了主角），华盛顿自然不服气。美国仍觉得自己可以回到当年的位置，而具体做法可概括为“先发制人“四字：也就是说，许多美国政客认为，改变未来配角命的方法就是先一步对未来的主角发动袭击，趁中国的军力还不那么强的时候
　
　　这种思路可以理解，甚至可以说无可厚非。可是从道德的角度来看，两国其实是应该良性竞争的：作为挑战者，中国肩负挑战现任全球老大的道德使命。如果中国做到了，中国就将取代美国成为新的全球最强。如果中国惜败了，没关系，我们仍然会赞赏中国的勇气。至于美国则相反，它的道德使命是接受其他人的挑战，与他们公平竞争，不耍花招。
　
　　全世界正在观看这场争斗。不论中国还是美国，如果有一方放弃了自己的使命，又或是坏了规矩，那以后也别想有哪个国家尊重它了。

　　先王已老，兀自挥刀不已

　　迄今为止，美国发动了178场战争和武装侵略，堪称是个经验丰富的老牌帝国主义国家，因而也就更患得患失，担惊受怕，这样的美国自然会畏惧中国。与之相反，中国没有这样的隐忧，他们没有一个人害怕美国。美国觉得自己一定要时不时亮亮肌肉，以显示自己有轰炸中国的能力，或许也就是出于这种心态吧。
　　这种举动落在俄罗斯、伊朗、印度、日本、中国和欧洲眼里，是个什么样子呢？每个人都感觉到了：美国，就像他之前的无数帝国一样，正日益变得自大和怨毒：关塔那摩虐囚案，在巴基斯坦的无人机、中东的战争、对全球人类的监视都是其表现。现在更是搞起了轰炸机外交，拿这个来搞中国了。
　　博弈论者或许会将这幅情形与“围棋”联系起来。您或许听说过围棋，这是一种著名的桌上战略游戏，有黑白两种棋子。现在美国及其盟友的举动，就好像是在试图一步步包围中国的棋子，从外围逼迫中国棋子向内收缩，最终让中国屈服归顺。

　　为了全人类

　　一些对中国古代思想颇有研究的人认为，中国是一个立足于儒家学说，具有长远的战略眼光的国家（围棋就是中国发明的哟），相比之下，美国就是个短视的牛仔男孩罢了。如今中美博弈，两边肯定要各尽所能，把自己最强的谋略拿出来。但从另一个角度想，围棋之所以像象棋一样如此具有竞争性，也是因为它的内在的“零和博弈”思想，双方无论哪一方赢了，另一方都要接受失败的结局。而对于全人类来说，类似“轰炸机过岛”这样的游戏，最好是不要再玩了。

　　本文作者Thorsten Pattberg（中文名裴德思），德国作家、学者、文化评论员，曾任北京大学高等人文研究院研究员，著有《东西二元论》。 

Source: http://club.mil.news.sina.com.cn/thread-643109-1-1.html

In Focus: Pattberg

Thanks to Global Asia for publishing the story. There's so much cronyism and nepotism in the Ivy League... Here's a video on that topic:

裴德思发表了《怎样翻译中华文明核心词》一文后，我国的刘延东副总理非常重视，提到请组织一些语言学家研究如何推广中华思想术语问题

 “天人合一”“浩然之气”“格物致知”“经世致用”“有教无类”……中华思想文化博大精深，但到底有哪些术语，如何解释？又如何翻译？

中华思想文化术语传播宣传片 - 裴德思发表了《怎样翻译中华文明核心词》

　　李卫红在讲话中指出，中华思想文化术语是中华优秀传统文化的精髓，是中华民族智慧的结晶，最能体现中华文化的精神特点和中华民族的思维方式。这些思想文化术语既是中华民族的宝贵财富，也是全人类的共同财富。当前，中外交流日益频繁，中国在世界格局中的影响力不断提高。世界需要认识中国、了解中国，中国也需要世界接受中国、理解中国。中华思想文化术语正是满足这种需求的“及时雨”。中华思想文化术语传播工作具有现实的迫切性和长远的重要性。

　　李卫红强调，“中华思想文化术语传播工程”的设立旨在梳理反映中国传统文化特征和民族思维方式、体现中国核心价值的思想文化术语，用易于口头表达、交流的简练语言客观准确地予以诠释、翻译，在政府机构、社会组织、传播媒体等对外交往活动中，传播好中国声音，讲好中国故事，让世界更多了解中国国情、历史和文化。为实现这一目标，要从以下方面做好工作：一是充分发挥“外语中文译写规范和中华思想文化术语传播部际联席会议”的作用；二是调动国内外更多的专家学者加入中华思想文化术语的研究队伍；三是多种渠道传播中华思想文化术语；四是探索建立系统有效的传播途径。[...]

自从2013年6月当时在北京大学做研究的德国学者裴德思发表了《怎样翻译中华文明核­心词》一文后，我国的刘延东副总理非常重视，提到“请组织一些语言学家研究如何推广中­华思想术语问题”。于是，由她倡导，由教育部、国家语委牵头组织的国家级重大项目“中­华思想文化术语传播工程”应运而生，“工程”办公室设于教育部语言文字信息管理司，秘­书处设于北京外国语大学外语教学与研究出版社。
“工程”的核心任务是整理、译介那些能够反映中国人自己的话语体系与核心价值观的思想­术语，如“道”、“气”、“和”等，并通过政府、民间的各种社会组织、传媒机构及各种­传媒手段向国内国际广泛进行传播。
项目自2013年12月开始启动，2014年5月正式组建顾问和专家团队，叶嘉莹、张­岂之、李学勤、林戊荪等著名学者应邀担任顾问，北京外国语大学党委书记韩震教授担任专­家委员会主任；下设文艺、历史、哲学、译审等四个学科组，参与术语整理、诠释、翻译、­审稿工作的成员均是在文学艺术、历史、哲学、英语翻译、国际中国学（汉学）等领域有较­高学术造诣的专家。项目启动至今，已完成首批81条术语的诠释与英语译写。