I find it interesting how blatantly those quoted in the article talk about the pursuit of wealth. One of the local Chinese governments even has an award for "expert in getting wealthy"! I guess it isn't as reprehensible coming from a country with so many rural poor, but I still find it depressing.
Can you explain this? Is it the pursuit of wealth that's reprehensible to you? Violating the taboo against talking too openly about it? Or just the ridiculous award?
I don't find it reprehensible at all. It's not like the cockroach farmer is saying he wants to be a party leader so he get lucrative contracts for his friends. He seems to be just selling a product.
I don't jive with the pursuit of wealth for wealth's sake. There was a study showing that once we have enough to be comfortable, additional wealth has no correlation with increased happiness. I also think that the materialistic and ultra-consupmtion-based aspects of many modern societies are somewhat harmful. It is all about status, posturing, and buying shit you don't need. But I don't want to rant too much :)
Not all countries/people feel bad about getting rich. :)
In China on every new Year you wish each other "prosperity" and this partly linked to making it big, too.
On the other hand, I new a girl who came over on a post-Tienanmen visa (they let practically anyone from China in to the US for a while after that incident). She was from a rural town, yet she told me they had a saying about Shanghainese (apparently there is a lot of regional jingoism there). The saying translated roughly as "You can't get that rich without doing something bad."
Maybe. I'm not saying that the attitude I described is universal, but I feel like in China you get a certain respect for being successful.
I feel it used to be the same in the US at some point in time. Getting rich was seen as a reward since you provided a good solution to consumers and therefore you could gain from the overall value you provided to society.
On HN, I'm not sure what is the trend, since you see people saying that "profit is evil" and stuff in that line of thought, as well as folks cheering for SpaceX, Tesla Motors' CEO Elon Musk who is getting very rich through the process of what he does - and it does not seem to bother many people in these kind of situations.
I feel it used to be the same in the US at some point in time. Getting rich was seen as a reward since you provided a good solution to consumers and therefore you could gain from the overall value you provided to society.
I don't think that's ever been the case in the US. There's long been an ideal that anyone can become prosperous, in the sense of upper-middle-class; that's the "American Dream". But people have also long been skeptical of the very wealthy, and in the early US there was even an ideal (though a pretty counterfactual one) that the US didn't really have any super-rich, in contrast to the British, but rather was a nation of approximate equals, everyone a tradesman, shopkeeper, yeoman farmer, etc.
The 19th-century industrialists were very unpopular among the general population, especially in the period before several of them made extensive efforts to improve their popularity through PR and philanthropy. Some of the industrialists themselves were even conflicted about the role of extreme wealth in society, which motivated writings like Andrew Carnegie's "Gospel of Wealth", in which he argued that the wealthy had an obligation to spend their wealth to improve society through philanthropy, and ought not to either spend it purely on personal luxury, or to keep it and produce hereditary family fortunes in the old European style.
"I feel it used to be the same in the US at some point in time."
It's interesting you say that because European right wingers always depict the US as a paradise where people can be wealthy (which they equate to successful) and respected for it.
"On HN, I'm not sure what is the trend, since you see people saying that "profit is evil" and stuff in that line of thought, as well as folks cheering for SpaceX, Tesla Motors' CEO Elon Musk"
I don't see any contradiction. Most people feel one should be rewarded based on their contribution to society, and have respect and admiration for skilled and ambitious persons.
What is usually debated is: how much should be the reward, and how to assess everyone's contribution.
It's interesting you say that because European right wingers always depict the US as a paradise where people can be wealthy (which they equate to successful) and respected for it.
What's interesting about it? And I have no idea why you start putting politics inside here - that was not the point. You are right about one thing, in Europe people are despised if they have money, no matter if they deserved it or not.
What is usually debated is: how much should be the reward, and how to assess everyone's contribution.
Vote with your wallet/dollars. What else is there to measure ? Honestly I don't see who would be in position to decide "what should be the reward" or these kind of things. That's why we have market systems, to avoid stupid solutions to this kind of issue.
Which award is more depressing? "expert in slacking off", "expert in staying poor", "expert in getting wealthy". Also note that it's not an award for "wealthy" but "expert in getting wealthy", and later in the article the award winner is also helping others to do what she does.
That's the Chinese culture. I live in Hong Kong, visit China from time to time and I see it everywhere. In the West, we politely pretend that we don't care about material wealth. The Chinese, on the other hand, spend lots of time and money to show off how rich they are.
Not all of them, obviously, I have some friends who don't share this attitude and I also heard about Chinese moving to the west, because they just couldn't stand it.
When I lived in Taiwan, there were wealthy people who lived in shabby looking houses that were indistinguishable from the dwellings of middle class and working class folks.
But if you went inside, you were likely to find all the trappings of 1980s affluence (all sorts of consumer electronics, nice art on the walls, gorgeous furniture).
China today has a nouveau riche that consumes conspicuously, but it's not a universal trait.
I met this guy in Sligo, Ireland, in 2000 and he invited me back to his place for a get-together with his friends. A lot of his friends were on the Dole. We were walking around his neighborhood, and he pointed to one house and said that guy was a millionaire. All the houses were of the same general appearance and the same size.
You can't have a multicultural civilization without some framework in which one makes judgements. A member's values (shown by actions) can't be incompatible with a multicultural society. Such a society would be too tolerant and wouldn't last.
I'm don't quite get what you are saying, but I also note, you are just saying it without backing it up in anyway.
Why wouldn't it last?
Why can't some members be incompatible with others?
Why must there be a framework to make judgements on others?
The United States is a good example (in a lot of ways) of successful multiculturalism (it's a bad example in some ways as well). But no official language, no restrictions on belief, the only consistant thing is a 'rule of law', is that what you mean by a framework for judging?
You can't have a stable multicultural situation where a part of the population can make multiculturalism impossible. Yes, you must have rule of law. You must also promulgate the ideology of multicultural tolerance itself. You cannot tolerate a certain level of intolerance.
Yes you can. The United states are my go to example for this as well. There are a number of White Supremacist groups in the US, which (mostly due to rule of law) are contained from ruining multiculturalism as whole (they probably have significant local effect). But they still are free to hold their beliefs and practice them (amongst themselves).
Tolerance for tolerance's sake eh? I don't think that endlessly and gratuiously chasing wealth is a healthy way to live, why should I change my opinion?
You referred to it as reprehensible. So you are basically saying that their culture is reprehensible (As the striving for wealth is well and truly part of Chinese culture).
That's fine to not like it your self... but to condemn others... That seems more than just intolerant, that is verging on bigoted.
I admit, my words may have come off stronger than I intended. I am not trying to condemn all of Chinese culture. I do think that some ways of living are better than others, and it should be fine to discuss these things. But I could have framed it more nicely, that is fair.
