So long as they spell my name right

Controversy. Has only just started, but it will come. Write negative about Chinese, be it culture, people, system or history, and your inbox could fill with angry emails, your name might appear on blogs (within 25 words of terms like wrong, incorrect, hates Chinese and ignorant).

I see three lines of attack.

1. I am not Chinese, therefore my examples/facts/arguments/conclusions are incorrect
2. much of my experience is from Taiwan, and China is different than Taiwan, therefore my book does not apply to China Chinese (or to Singapore or Hong Kong Chinese).
3. these Chinese have changed in these ways, thus my book does not describe the "current Chinese behaviors" for these Chinese

No. 1 is used to prove me [what I say about Chinese ...] wrong. It is a classic ad hominem, that is, attacking something about the arguer rather than the arguer's argument. The rule is that you almost-never have to know anything about the arguer to analyze his/her argument. Smart people can say something stupid, stupid people can say something smart ... and Canadians can say something true about Chinese.

No. 2 confuses politics and economics with culture. Certainly Taiwan is different than China, and Singapore and HK, but different on what level or in what area? Different political and economic systems certainly, and different levels of development, okay. But different cultures? Meaning different Chinese? I am not so sure, at least not in the areas I write about.

All four Chinas have the same education system, top down, objective, memory-oriented. Each teach the same parables from the same ancient novels and poems, Li Bai, Dream Of The Red Chamber and Romance Of The Three Kingdoms. Each use identical Rules of Communication, for example, that negatives are best expressed indirectly, that disagreements should be polite, that you should not let people know you don't understand or that you should not embarrass people in front of a group. (And while China uses simplified characters and the rest use traditional, and while slang and word usage is different, each China uses the same language, and teaches the same dialect, Mandarin.) Each China still relies on guanxi in business, each reveres the family and each puts harmony and stability as the society's key goals. How different can they be?

The differences people see, especially Chinese people, are differences in outer attitude, in the way people act and dress.

No. 3 is accurate, just not especially important. Without a doubt there are Chinese sub-groups who have changed further than I say in my book. Yet, I do not ONCE say that "all" Chinese are anything, but rather say that "Chinese tend to ...," an argument to a general cause. And in a general argument exceptions are expected, just not very important. Only when exceptions become so numerous as to start being the norm rather than the exception do exceptions matter.

Ah, but how do we deal with these exceptions? How frequent are they? I strongly believe that there are far fewer exceptions than people realize, at least on the basic, fundamental level I write about. It is very easy to confuse outer appearance, good English say, nice appearance and good manners, to mean that these Chinese have changed from the norm. Well, they have changed...as far as outer appearances are concerned. Not so much on the fundamental levels I write about though.

It is my strong opinion that until the education system (home and school) changes Chinese will not change, at least on the fundamental levels I write about. For more see my April 19 post, "But Chinese Have Changed!"

So, let the controversies commence. And, using the old PR rule, anything said is good ... as long as they spell my name right: "Greg" with two Gs, one at the start and one at the end, and "Bissky" with double S, not single.