via: flowing waters never stale
i can't agree more with the first part of his article, which analyses the different ways that europeans and americans view the world. mark indicates why he prefers the european way of observing the world:
... so that I can gain a broader insight, so that I can develop for myself a fairer, more balanced set of views. I prefer rough shades of grey from glossy surfaces brushed with a straight black or white.
as for the following analysis and conclusions on legitimacy issues, i am not quite convinced.
anyway, the "china article" section of FWNS blog is interesting.
update:
MAJ asked me:
I am interested though, in knowing what exactly it is about my analysis that you don't find "quite" convincing. Perhaps I can then address some of your concerns.
i find your arguments apply for those chinese emperors in history and are consistent with their "theory" to rule: as long as an emperor protects and feeds his people, he has the right to rule. this is my understanding of "legitimacy", it is something empowered beforehand and checked (or re-empowered) during its function.
war used to be the only way to gain "legitimated" right to govern, not only in china but also in many parts of the world. and unfortunately war was also the way to check and re-legitimize in most of chinese history, like the change of chinese dynasties. the fact that it worked in the past doesn't mean it has a place in the present day or in the future.
it might be legitimated considering what it is doing today but it still need some kind of empowerment, i won't expect such forms like free elections in the near future, but there are many things taht we can do to check and re-legitimize within the system.