Third Short Quiz – Preface Through Chapter 8

[johnkarls]

.

It is respectfully suggested that you make a list of your own questions that are provoked by “On Xi Jinping” – since all of us are unique and your questions are worth discussing also!!!


1. In the preface (p. xiv), does Kevin Rudd say that “cheaters” need only read Chapters 1,3,4, 14, 15 & 16?

2. Also in the preface (p. xvi), does Rudd summarize the thesis of “On Zi Jinping” as Zi has taken --

(A) Chinese politics to the Leninist left,

(B) Chinese economics to the Marxist left, and

(C) Chinese foreign policy to the nationalist right?

3. While worshipping AI, does Rudd attempt to define it??? What is AI, really??? Does Rudd seem to know or did he appear to toss the term, without any comprehension, into his Oxford-PhD-thesis on which “On Xi Jinping” is based in order to get “full marks”???

4. Does Rudd say AI is merely ONE of FIVE “major global change drivers”?

5. Despite claiming to examine “The Impact of the Classical Tradition on Contemporary Chinese Worldviews,” does Rudd fail to even mention Buddhism???

6. If you read Rudd, would you even know that Buddhism was introduced into China during the Han Dynasty (296 B.C. - 220 A.D.) and that it spread across China DUE TO IMPERIAL PATRONAGE during the Tang Dynasty (618 A.D. – 907 A.D.)??? BTW, how do these beginnings compare with the invention of Islam by the Prophet Muhammad (circa 570 A.D. - 632 A.D.)?

7. Even though the Chinese Communists have succeeded in effectively eradicating religion (except, perhaps, in the secular sense), isn’t it worth a mention that China had for centuries the world’s largest Buddhist population and that its effective eradication resulted in Buddhism being the only one of the world’s four major religions (i.e., more than a billion adherents – Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism) to plummet to approximately 500 million adherents?

8. After all, wouldn’t a worthy topic for investigation by Rudd and his Oxford U friends be whether Chinese Communism in its various forms 1949 - 2025 is/was similar to a religion?

9. BTW, does Henry Kissinger’s (aka Richard Nixon’s) historic 1972 “Opening to China” even rate a mention anywhere in “On Xi Jinping”??? And how Chairman Mao “rolled” Kissinger/Nixon into saying Taiwan was Chinese territory IN ORDER TO LET AMERICA PROTECT CHINA FROM AN IMMINENT RUSSIAN INVASION??? After all, wasn’t Xi Jinping nearly 20 years old when Nixon visited??? And wouldn’t Xi have been aware of Russia’s impending invasion??? Or was the media muzzled, at least in this regard???

10. After all, despite a failure to mention the Kissinger/Nixon concession that Taiwan was Chinese territory, doesn’t Rudd claim one of his book’s chief virtues is its explanation of Chinese foreign policy??? And what is more central, at least as a threshold issue, than Taiwan???

11. Is Rudd correct to emphasize Chairman Mao’s worship of “struggling”???

12. After all, didn’t Charman Mao rule China since the Nationalists departed for Taiwan in 1949 until 1976? And didn’t Chairman Mao worship “struggle” as a way of focusing his followers during the Japanese occupation in World War II and the Chinese Civil War with the Nationalists until their departure for Taiwan in 1949, causing him to launch --

(A) his “Great Leap Forward” (1958-1962) which killed an estimated 15-55 million Chinese with the consensus at 30 million,

(B) his “Cultural Revolution” (1966-1976) which killed millions of Chinese, and

(C) his aborted Russian invasion (circa 1972) which he only reluctantly gave up in order to permit Nixon/Kissinger to protect China IN EXCHANGE FOR THEIR CONCESSION THAT TAIWAN IS PART OF CHINA.

13. Did Rudd properly report that upon Chairman Mao’s death, the Chinese “Communist” Central Committee became overnight the world’s largest “billionaire’s club” as its members dealt out to each other all of the government-owned companies which were promptly taken public in the West???

14. And did Rudd properly report that Russian Communism and Chinese Communism became radically different because the Chinese were still primarily agrarian and their “capitalist reform” was to permit farmers to retain 50% of what they grew (which was wildly popular), whereas the Russians were more advanced industrially and their “capitalist reform” was to let go bankrupt any government enterprise that didn’t turn a profit (which threatened much of the populace with the loss of employment)???

15. Have Rudd and his Oxford U associates never read in the 41 years since it was published, James Michener’s “Poland” which chronicles how, following the Russian-Communist revolution, Western-European Capitals including Paris and London despaired that the “Red Army” which was growing like a snowball rolling downhill as the proletariat rose to join its ranks, could be prevented from “rolling to the Atlantic” including occupying the U.K., but the Polish Army whose rank and file were almost solely Polish peasants, defeated the “Red Army” in the pivotal “Polish-Soviet War” (2/14/1920 – 3/19/1921) because the Polish peasants decided they would prefer to be ruled by their Polish masters rather than the Russian proletariat???

16. If Rudd and his Oxford U associates had acquainted themselves with the Polish-Soviet War of 1920-1921, why would they have been so surprised on p. 62 of “On Xi Jinping” when commenting on Russian/Chinese relations that nationalism can “trump” ideology???

17. Is “On Xi Jinping” sloppy by suddenly on p. 64 referring to someone called “Levine” without even giving a first name, much less any additional info???

18. Is evidence of additional sloppiness that “Levine” (still sans first name) and his views continue to be mentioned AND DISCUSSED AT LENGTH on p. 65 even though Rudd’s index claims “Levine” is only mentioned ANYWHERE IN THE BOOK on p. 64???

19. Is “Levine” Stephen Levine whose brief bio on the U. of Montana website says (https://www.umt.edu/mansfield/about/man ... hp?ID=1441) --

• Senior Fellow, Chinese History and Politics, and U.S.-China Relations
• Steven I. Levine writes and lectures on Chinese history and politics and U.S.-China relations. During a forty-year teaching career, he taught, inter alia, at American University, Columbia University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as well as the University of Montana. He has written, co-authored, edited, and translated (from Chinese and Russian) some dozen books in his fields of interest as well as published scores of journal articles, book chapters, and review essays.*
• B.A. Brandeis University 1962; Ph.D. Harvard University 1972
• Languages: Chinese (Mandarin), Russian
[* but apparently no books.]

20. Does Rudd at least mention that the Sino-Soviet split (p. 66) “erupted in full public view…in 1960”?

21. Has our organization often marveled that our American intelligence services reported, BEGINNING IN 1959, that the USSR and the CCP were at each other’s throats AND GAVE A REASON – viz., that

(A) The USSR had viewed Russian Turkestan as the place to locate all of its nuclear tests and, for the sake of efficiency, all of their nuclear laboratories, nuclear-weapons-construction facilities, etc., BECAUSE THE USSR DID NOT CARE ABOUT THE SAFETY OF ITS TURKISH/ISLAMIC POPULATION (much like Nevada for the U.S. and Pacific atolls for the French and, wouldn’t you know it, Australia for the Brits);

(B) Ditto for China and Chinese Turkestan (aka Sinkiang Province);

(C) By 1959 per American intelligence, both China and the USSR were trying to UNITE THE TWO TURKESTANS under rival popular leaders – which, if successful, would render the other country a NON-NUCLEAR POWER OVRNIGHT.

(D) BTW, this meant that for any American decision-maker who read the 1959-et seq. intelligence, THERE WAS NO NEED TO FIGHT THE VIETNAM WAR – and it wasn’t until Henry Kissinger read and believed in the Sino-Soviet split, that he quickly brought the Vietnam War to a close.

22. Does Rudd dismiss the Sino-Soviet split as mere nationalism WITHOUT MENTIONING THE NUCLEAR ISSUE???!!!

23. MEGA-QUESTION – Does Rudd seem to believe that each Chinese leader’s political/economic/foreign philosophy drove his policy decisions, RATHER THAN merely providing excuses for what he wanted to do??? And were probably adopted ex post facto???

24. Though vis-à-vis the “ex post facto” comment in Q-24, wasn’t it also true that for some Chinese leaders, their views were “before the fact” akin to a political platform on which they vied to lead the country??? Though aren’t such philosophers hard to find because, like in other countries, their so-called principles have “to take a back seat” to pragmatism and their thirst for power???

25. In this regard, does Chapter 4 (“Changes to China’s Ideological Worldview Under Xi Jinping (2012-2017)”) deal with five addresses that he made 2013-2017 – AFTER BECOMING General Secretary (i.e., leader) of the Communist Party and Chairman of the Central Military Commission, both in 2012, and President of China beginning in 2013???

26. Why doesn’t Rudd cite any Xi writings before he came to power??? Does Rudd’s failure mean there weren’t any – that Xi was “just keeping his head down” until he felt comfortable opening his mouth???

27. Did Xi Jinping ruthlessly eliminate power rivals such as Bo Xilai who was removed from his posts in 2012 and then convicted of bribery and embezzlement??? Does this smack of Chinese “Lawfare”???

28. Is it coincidental that Bo Xilai was being persecuted and prosecuted in 2012 just when Xi Jinping was becoming General Secretary (i.e., leader) of the Communist Party and Chairman of the Central Military Commission, both in 2012, and the following year President of China beginning in 2013???

29. Did Xi Jinping even ruthlessly eliminate in 2022 his predecessor in those three posts – Hu Jintao – who had served in each of those three posts for 10 years???

30. Can anyone forget the video clip from the 20th Party Congress in 2022 just before the Congress was to elect or re-elect someone to those three posts for the next 10 years –

• Showing Xi’s predecessor, Hu Jintao, seated immediately to Xi’s right and, on the other side of Hu Jintao, a Xi rival who was widely expected to be elected to succeed Xi.
• Showing Hu Jintao being pulled from his seat and escorted out of the hall by two men who were obviously Chinese police.
• Hu Jintao gesturing his protest to Xi Jinping and then, as he was being dragged away from Xi and out of the hall, placing his hand on Xi’s rival whom everyone expected to be voted as Xi’s successor as if to dramatize Hu’s blessing on the rival.
(NB: Needless to say, the Party Congress delegates were so stunned and cowed by these theatrics that Xi was overwhelmingly re-elected.]

31. Are video clips of that event still available via YouTube from at least 5 sources – The UK Guardian, CNN, Reuters, TaiwanPlus News, and India’s WION News?

32. Now back to Xi for 2022-2032, what does it matter to the world whether he has taken Chinese politics to the Leninist left???

33. And re the second of Rudd’s three themes about Xi taking Chinese economics to the Marxist left – what does this matter to the world???

34. Shouldn’t the world’s focus be on the third theme – Xi taking Chinese foreign policy to the nationalist right???

35. And even more importantly, shouldn’t the world be focused on China’s “gunboat-diplomacy military” which is superior to the U.S. in many respects – even if America aspired to be “The Policeman of the World”???

36. Focused certainly, for example, on the size of its Navy (which is what projects force or “gunboat diplomacy”) and its navy-ship-building capacity which is many times larger than America’s???

37. Will America be saved from Chinese domination by the invention of a new super-weapon, similarly to the way nuclear weapons brought a sudden end to World War II in the Pacific against Imperial Japan???