Pudong, Shanghai - From the 1990's to now.

by fulltimestudent 13 Replies latest social current

• 

  fulltimestudent

  In 1989 Pudong looked like this:

  

  and about the same time, like this:

  
  

  In the early 1990's some of the first high-rise office blocks were built, and I recall an article in a Sydney newspaper poking some fun at the "stupid Chinese," because these office blocks had hardly any tenants.

  Not so long before that, Pudong, on the wrong side of the Huangpu river, had been paddyfields and shantys, where the poorest people lived. It was chiefly famous as the birthplace of Du Yuesheng, who rose from a life as a slum kid, to being the most powerful gangster in China, and a key supporter and bag-man (funds collector) for Chiang Kai-shek who became President of China until his defeat by the Communists in 1949.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  Today, Pudong looks like this:

  The view from the latest addition to the Pudong skyline, the 632 metre high Shanghai Tower.

  or

  

  or the view from across the river

  
  
• 

  Simon

  I'm sure there are lots of nice Chinese people, there has to be because there are so many of them.

  But why are there so many cruel inhuman backward moronic ones?

  Why are they always trying to smuggle suitcases full of raw meat through customs? They are nuts. All the border shows are the same.

  Worse though is the shocking torture and killing of dogs. They actually believe that the more the creature suffers the better is meat tastes. Fucktards.

  That's before we get to the decimation of endangered species because some retard somewhere thinks it will make his tiny dick work again.

  If the Chinese can reign in their crazies, I'd be more interested in their culture. Until then I just hope it will die and be subsumed by a civilized one.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  The new Shanghai tower has been built with great decorative lighting. It has two skins, the outer with a dramatic, architectural groove, spiralling up the building. And an inner skin that provides the wall of each floor. The void between the inner and outer walls functions as a ventilation shaft that cuts heating and cooling costs.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT7tI1d8VP0
  
• 

  Simon

  They have some educated and advanced people at one end. People who torture dogs and want to eat rare animals at the other. In the middle are people who make shoes, iPhones and happy meal toys.

  To be fair, Europe has bullfighting but at least there is some risk to the human and the animal sometimes wins.

  Google Shulin dog meat festival. Disgusting.

  Do multi-storey buildings make up for it?
• 

  fulltimestudent

  Simon: Why do they need to try and smuggle suitcases full of rs meat through customs? They are nuts. All the border shows are the same.

  I cant make any intelligent response to that.

  Simon: Worrse though is the shocking torture and killing of dogs. They actually believe that the more the creature suffers the better is meat tastes. Fucktards. ... Simon: That's before we get to the decimation of endangered species because some regard somewhere thinks it will make his tiny dick work again.

  The killing of animals for meat is a problem, as is the methods of slaughter. Its taken a long time in some so-called civilised countries to prohibit inhumane killing methods. Currently in the world the Japanese and some Scandinavians are under pressure for killing whales. Australians are under pressure for killing kangaroos, usually by young men who kill for the sheer joy of killing something. i.e. the slaughtered animals are just thrown away.

  Its difficult to put ourselves in the position of the Chinese, who are only a generation or so from a time when food was scarce. Today, food can hardly be called scarce anymore, and likely the same social processes that led to changes in the west will change Chinese practises.

  However, the same process that has led to more food for humans, has also caused many animal species to become endangered. In Australia, koala bears (to illustrate) are endangered because their habitat is destroyed to permit more farmland. Many small native Australian animals have been slaughtered by cats, who are owned by people who like their company, but will not make sure that they are house cats only.

  And sometimes the problem is even more complex. e.g in North China against the Russian border there is some evidence that tigers are returning to the area. What will happen when the first human child is killed by a wild tiger. I'm guessing it will be like India, where villagers, in that circumstance, will make sure that the tiger does not kill a human again.

  Not perfect answers to the points you raised, but the matters you raised (and that I have responded to) are so complex that mere name-calling will not bring a solution.

  
  
  
• 

  Simon

  Sorry, my tablet auto correct is making me look illiterate. I'll correct things when I'm back at my pc.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  OK- let's try an answer to this point.

  Simon: Google Shulin dog meat festival. Disgusting.

  Your viewpoint and mine. But friends of mine believe that killing any animal is wrong. But , likely, we (humans) are still dependent on some complete protein foods in our diet. Whether people make a festival or not (I'm thinking of duck-hunting) is often dependent on their own local traditions.

  Simon: Do multi-storey buildings make up for it?

  You could see that process as part of the change from a peasant society to what we call modernity.

  In what we call modernity, there are choices. In the agrarian societies which were most common in the past, there was little choice. Both your ancestors and mine knew hunger (if your forbears were commoners).

  Even for my parents, food was a major expense. As a kid, I trapped rabbits to help the family budget. The steel-jawed trap is an instrument of torture, and leaves the rabbit alive in agony. I killed them when I caught them with a hard hit to the back of the head with a steel bar. OK then, but likely not today. My kids called me a brute when I told them my stories of rabbit trapping. (I also made useful pocket money from skinning them and selling the skins)

  The buildings I'm discussing are part of the complex lives we lead that allow choice as to occupation and food. I'm sure you see that?
• 

  fulltimestudent

  So where was this heading. I wanted to use Pudong as a metaphor for change (in China). Last night, discussing a new trade treaty, the Australian Prime Minister described the changes in China (particularly since 1980) as the greatest movement to prosperity that the world has ever seen.

  He apparently believes that the new treaty locks Australia into the increasing Chinese prosperity, as it will allow Australian primary products, and Australian service industries free access to the Chinese market and economy.

  In Pudong, the Australian business men I mentioned earlier did not believe that the first high-rise building heralded anything. Based on their own experience, they could not believe that the miniscule (as it was then) Chinese economy would ever develop as it has. But it did happen and it seems in the PM's opinion that Australian prosperity is (at least in part) is dependent.

  Another anecdote. In the early 2000s (2003 or 4, I think), John Howard, the then PM of Australia made his second visit to Cina (and first to Shanghai) and got to his hotel in Shanghai at night. The story goes that in his suite, his staff opened the window drapes to reveal the lighted buildings of Pudong.

  Howard was gob-smacked, "Shit!!!" he is supposed to have exclaimed, "how long has this been going on?"
• 

  Simon

  I have no problem with people killing animals to eat. I have most respect for people who make good use of much of the animal (e.g. Inuits) and less for the factory farming where they only use a small part (e.g. whales for perfume).

  I'm not a vegan type who objects to meat on principle. I eat meat and don't fell too bad for it but most of the time I prefer vegetables. I'd rather my food didn't suffer on it's way to my plate.
  

  If anyone is killing an animal directly to eat then I'm even more fine with that. But do it cleanly. Same for hunting - if it's part of managing a population of animals then I am OK with it as long as it is done in a humane way.

  Humane. ... don't we almost judge our humanity by how we treat people and animals at the point of death?

  The is no excuse or justification for the beating, boiling alive, skinning alive torture of dogs. It is inhumane. It's inhuman. It is sub-human.

  Likewise the people who will hack off the tusk of elephants and rhinos and leave to creature to die a horrible death or it's traumatized young to suffer and die next to their bodies.

  I don't know what I can do. I can't go to Africa and shoot a poacher. I can't "stop" buying ivory if I've never bought it before. I can't do anything can I?

  But I can refuse to take part in any pro-china messaging and tell the world that I think they are sick for doing what they do and not making it illegal. I can say "sorry, china - I'm not buying anything you make while you are tolerating these crimes".

  Yes, there is a difference with all the things you describe - most civilized countries have some rules so if people are being cruel then they are breaking some form of laws.

  The way to protect endangered species is to make the trade illegal and to have severe punishments for them and embarrass anyone who tolerates it. Seriously, I would be happy to see people executed rather than have them cause such harm to such intelligent animals.

  Developed civilizations have to put pressure on developing people to make it clear what is and isn't acceptable and I think trade and publicity are valid weapons to do this. Part of that is making people aware of what is going on so if they are thinking of buying a product they can make sure they are not supporting a cruel regime in doing so if they so chose.