No, you are really not.
As many others have pointed out above, the average Chinese person on the street couldn't care less about all this stuff you are throwing out, and would probably laugh at you.
You think that you understand, but you probably understand less than even an average Indian. As they say: "A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing".
It is nice that we have this forum to exchange views. Increase understanding between countries is beneficial for all. But you shouldn't say people of so and so country is like this, and here is a frame to box them in, and this is how they would always react etc etc.
Chinese are as individualistic as anyone else.
Else, heh, why are there so many chinese traitors throughout history? They obviously don't behave like drones.
Since it is always interesting to interact, let me respond.
1. Someone mentioned about Indian and Chinese frogs.
Well as far as the Chinese frog is concerned, there is no doubt about the limited vision it has since it has been reiterated by none other than The Great Helmsman Mao Tse Tung.
He told the Chinese people, who he thought were frogs, the following:
“We think too small, like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view.”
Mao Tse-Tung
Now, if the Great Helmsman Mao thought so, who am I to dispute?
While I might not subscribe to all views of the Great Helmsman, yet there is no doubt that he was a wise man and proved by bringing a indolent and lazy, visonless frogs in the well with limited view lot into the heights that they claim to have reached.
That settles the frog issue.
2. As far as none in China believes in the Theory of Legalism.
Let us see the purpose of Legalism.
The entire system was set up to make model citizens behave and act how the dynasty wanted them to act against their will. The laws supported by the Legalists were
meant to support the state, the emperor, and his military. They were also reform-oriented and innovative. In theory, the Legalists believed that if the punishments were heavy and the law equally applied, neither the powerful nor the weak would be able to escape state control. The Legalists especially emphasized pragmatism over precedence and custom as the basis of law. Guided by Legalist thought, the First Qin Emperor, Qin Shi Huang, would weaken the power of the feudal lords, divide the unified empire into thirty-six administrative provinces, and standardize the writing system. Reflecting Legalist passion for order and structure, Qin soldiers were only mobilized when both halves of tiger-shaped tallies (one held by the ruler and the other by the commanding general) were brought together. Likewise, all documents in the empire had to have recorded the year they were written, the scribe who copied them, and up to the exact hour of delivery. Accepting Shang Yang’s earlier emphasis on the standardization of weights and measures, the Qin Shi Huang would also accept Shang Yang’s philosophy that no individual in the state should be above the law (by ensuring harsh punishments for all cases of dissent) and that families should be divided into smaller households. While there is reason to doubt Sima Qian’s claim that Qin Shi Huang did in fact divide households into groups of ten, certainly the other examples of standardization and administrative organization undertaken by the First Emperor reflect the importance of Legalist thought in Qin law. Based on promoting the interests of the state Qin, the law (Chinese: 法; pinyin: fǎ; literally "law, method, way") served as a vehicle to both control the populace and eliminate dissent.
Now, it would be surprising if it is said that it is not in vogue now!!
What is totalitarianism all about?
Of course the Chinese will laugh as you say so eloquently. Why should they not? It is the best way to avoid embarrassing realities - Laugh it off and pretend it does not exist.
3. Why are there traitors in Chinese history?
You tell us. if I say anything you would take it as an offence!
4. Do I understand? and do I know less than the average Indian about China?
Maybe I understand less than many. No qualms on that. Of course, you all understand everything about everything.
However, I do understand one thing - Chinese run away from bitter truth and are too obsessed to obfuscate and attempt to throw red herrings to veer off the attention from embarrassing issues. If they were honest in their approach, then they would have had the courage to debunk each point not by running away and obfuscating, but facing the issue head on.
As for Taiwan and its origin, much could be said.
." I'm very very surprised you know that.
