An Assistant to the Judge of Hell. Ming Dynasty. British Museum
The initial contact looked like a textbook example of diplomacy and mutual respect. Adelina Zhang, in particular, handled herself with great poise, sophistication and charm, coming across as a seasoned diplomat. It was a great example of international camaraderie and cultural exchange.
But then came the demands. The British do not take well to demands and they bring out a stubborn streak in us. The British also see freedom of expression as an unofficial national religion. This religion is already under the constant threat of censorship from the globalists who control the British Government. By continuing the demands there will be no chance what-so-ever of success from any face saving efforts.
I find Chinese civilisation fascinating as it has contributed so much to the world. Thanks to “Pianogate” we get to learn about contemporary Chinese politics from the perspective of Hong Kong and Taiwan rather than from the People’s Republic of China.
As seen in the earlier video, this was the perfect opportunity for the application of soft power that could have put the People’s Republic in a positive rather than a negative light.
China has a huge potential to influence world events using its ancient and sophisticated culture alone. Yet the People’s Republic seems so insistent on adopting a belligerent and bullying approach to its international relations. This reluctance to deploy its cultural strength is the most potent weakness of the People’s Republic of China and something than can and will be exploited.
“Pianogate” shines a bright light on this weakness.
It started as a friendly cultural exchange demonstrating the dignity and cultural refinement of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) but then descended into the acrimony of #Pianogate.
The initial contact looked like a textbook example of diplomacy and mutual respect. Adelina Zhang, in particular, handled herself with great poise, sophistication and charm, coming across as a seasoned diplomat. It was a great example of international camaraderie and cultural exchange.
Textbook diplomacy
The Chinese group then moved away, apparently happy with the positive interaction.
Something then changed. It was as if they found out that some fundamental principle of the ‘Central Committee’ had been inadvertently violated. It now became imperative for the exchange to be strook from the public record.
It was as if they were back in the Middle Kingdom where the writ of the Party serves as divine command. Demands for censorship were made, threats issued, and accusations of ‘racism’ put forward. However, before anyone could be sent off to a reeducation camp, the Police intervened onto the scene.
It was then that, perhaps, the most shocking and egregious part of the incident took place. All the Police needed to do was to simply explain UK law, outline the principles of freedom of expression, and tell the ‘protesters’ to move along. Rather than acting like citizens in uniform following Peelian principles they go into their increasingly familiar ‘Stasi Mode’.
The female Police officer did not want to be recoded despite the fact that two tier politically motivated policing is prevalent in the UK and that people need to record interactions with them for their own protection.
The tone of the police officer seemed brusque and accusatory. The British Police have become too used to behaving like entitled autocrats enforcing speech codes and investigating ‘Tweetcrime’. It is as if they get their inspiration from the People’s Republic itself.
It was the police intervention and its resemblance to that which would be expected in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that was the most upsetting and worrying part of this incident.
***
The following is the footage from the livestream of the incident, the excitement begins after the 9 minute mark:
The livestream of the Pianogate incident
***
It was only after all this that things began to get surreal. The pianist, Brendan Kavanagh, became concerned that pressure was apparently being applied onto YouTube to enforce the censorship demands. It was also suggested that members of the Chinese community had come forward saying that there was more to the incident than met the eye.
Call for help
It was then revealed that the piano, located at St Pancras Station in London, had been taken out of use, cordoned off and put under guard. It was as if the servile new British instinct for censorship and wokery had automatically gone into effect.
Piano under lockdown!
By this stage Brendan was on TV talking to people like Piers Morgan and the video was going viral and getting international attention. It was becoming a New Media version of the Cuban Missile Crisis, with the potential for ambassadors being recalled and ships putting to sea. It was reported that Elton John’s team (Elton John donated the piano) had been approached for comment.
Talk TV
Piers Morgan Show
During this whole internet event, people became familiar with a concept known as the ‘Streisand Effect’ which is about unintended consequences and means that the more someone tries to cover something up or censor it, the more publicity it receives. #Pianogate became a textbook example of this effect.
They also got an insight into some modern Chinese political nomenclature and issues:
They were informed about the meaning of the term ‘Little Pink’ which refers to the younger generation of Chinese nationalists constantly pushing the virtues of the CCP online with the fervour of Mao’s Red Guard.
Another concept that came up was ‘Wolf Warrior Diplomacy’ an aggressive tactic used to push your point even if your side of the argument lacks legitimacy or merit. This explains the point when Newton Leng shouted at Brendan with the melodramatic and completely unnecessary ‘Stop Touching Her!!!’ after he nearly touched the little Chinese flag she was holding. This led to meme-making and mockery such as the tune in the following clip:
A meme about ‘Wolf Warrior Diplomacy‘
Finally we learned about the cancellation of Winnie the Pooh in China.
Despite all the restrictions on free speech in the UK that prevent discussion on matters of everyday concern it is still safe to criticise the most powerful dictator in the world. Apparently, in China, the lovable Winnie the Pooh is verboten because of his apparent resemblance to the Great Leader – Xi Jinping. So people had the chance to let go of their pent up frustrations and let rip. Poor old President Xi became the focus of mockery in order to satisfy the inherent need of Britons to express themselves freely – he provided a safe outlet.
The cancellation of Winnie the Pooh
The Winnie the Pooh Dance Troupe
China’s Winnie the Pooh ban explained
This episode was a real missed opportunity for cross cultural friendship between British and PRC citizens. Instead the protagonists on the Chinese side seemed to be pressing the same censorious and woke buttons that globalists in the British government are always pressing suggesting a possible connivance between them. Nevertheless, it has built links between British Citizens and the worldwide Chinese diaspora which is a good thing.
I have a lot of time for Chinese civilisation and culture. China has contributed a great deal to the world. In some ways this incident has renewed my interest in learning about China. I have certainly learned more than I knew before and now want to know more.
In closing this blogpost, I must say – the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has never done me any harm, nor undermined my democratic rights or freedom to speak my mind – unless of course they are secretly in league with the Davos Globalists who have! However, the globalists do seem to be using the PRC as a model to help them build their own autocracy. In this regard the issue of freedom of expression and censorship in Britain is related to freedom of expression and censorship in China. Meanwhile, we are remain afflicted by a Western Davos Globalist elite that have lost the Mandate of Heaven.
According to THIS article, China plans to dispatch its research ship, Kexue, into Philippine waters. I think this helps tell the story of China’s Future approach to foreign policy.
What do they mean by ‘research ship’, is this another way of saying spy ship. I really don’t understand why this apparent territorial aggression is being used by China as its principle approach. Surely, Chinese foreign policy would be far more effective it used soft power and its immense cultural influence to shape events. That would be much more in tune with the approach of the great Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu, to go with the flow and take the path of least resistance. China would be able to achieve a cultural victory and immeasurably increase its influence and in the complete absence of conflict.
I wonder, will the Philippines respond by sending its own ‘research ship’ into Chinese territorial waters, perhaps adjacent to sensitive military installations. My guess is that it will not.
I would guess that this is not about research, it is more likely to be show of force – we can do this and there is nothing you can do about it! Like with the man made island in the South China Sea, this is about securing resources for the exclusive use of the expanding Chinese economy.
Will the traditional South East Asian ‘bandwagoning effect’ be reasserted by neighbouring countries accepting suzerainty of the Middle Kingdom? Or alternatively, will these countries band together to protect their interests like used to happen with the classic age of balance of power in Europe?
I suppose the Chinese approach might be a way of getting an answer to this question. It can then shape its future foreign policy accordingly.
The way China acts with regard to the current crisis on the Korean Peninsula could represent a key turning point in the evolution of the international world order. It could be as symbolic as the United States taking over the role of the British Empire in the Greek Civil War in 1947. To many that represented the peaceful transfer of global hegemonic power from Pax Britannica to Pax Americana.
China is currently an aspiring hegemonic power though currently fails to realise its potential primarily because it focuses on deploying only its hard power in the form of territorial aggrandisement. Such an approach causes the countries it wants to lead to be nervous of its power. China could learn much by studying the rise of the United States in the twentieth century. Chinese foreign policy would be better served by deploying its massive cultural potential and historic leadership role in the region that goes back to ancient times.
China may currently be nervous of a united Korea but it shouldn’t be. Its unease probably arises from the assumption that a united Korea would be an America client. However, by doing so China is underestimating its geostrategic potential. In many regards China has been presented with a huge opportunity.
If China unilaterally decided to liberate North Korea and announced its intention to facilitate the creation of a free and united Korea at the outset it would gain immense international prestige that would dwarf anything that it has previously achieved in the modern era. As a result, its cultural influence would expand exponentially. Such action could even permanently dislodge the United States from its position of preeminance in South Korea and the wider region.
China appears to be in favour of a rule based international economic order. If it started to adopt a similar approach to international politics and focused on being a bulwark of international law and using its soft rather than its hard power then China would be closer to its ultimate aim of providing regional and even global leadership.
However, the Chinese liberation of North Korea would have to be accompanied by a major shift in Chinese geopolitical doctrine for its effects to be decisive. At the moment, China is in dispute with many of its neighbours in the South China Sea where it has displayed unreasonable territorial ambitions. It should commit itself to an amicable resolution of that dispute.
If China behaved honourably in Korea and followed this up with a solution to the South China Sea dispute it would begin to realise its desire to be a real leader in global affairs. This could even be the first step in the restoration of China as the Middle Kingdom in fact rather than just name.
Donald Trump claims that Mexico will pay for the boarder defences that he plans to build on his country’s southern border. Today we get a glimpse of Trump’s strategic thinking and deal making genius, that maybe, just maybe might be applied to his most noteworthy proposed building project.
A few weeks ago he caused a furore when he made a simple telephone call to the leader of Taiwan. This tiny act upset the diplomatic relations between China and the United States. Previous administrations had followed a policy of not officially recognising Taiwan as a truly independent nation. This was a wink and a nod to the Chinese claim that Taiwan is nothing more than a rebellious Chinese province, even though in every real sense Taiwan is a country like any other. Trump’s phone call implied that he would be willing to recognise Taiwan as a fully independent nation.
However, in recent remarks, President Elect Trump appears to be suggesting that the One China Policy will be left intact, but perhaps only if the Chinese make some reasonable minor concessions in trading arrangements. The subheading on an article posted today on The Guardian website makes this exact point: “President-elect also hints that Beijing will need to show good faith on trade practices for him to commit to ‘One China’ policy”
This “hint” by Trump about future US relations with China, also gives us a glimpse of Trump’s strategic thinking and deal making genius. By taking part in the telephone call he uses something that is supposedly settled, the One China Policy, disrupts it and then puts a price on returning it to a state of normality.
The costs are all on China’s side and the net benefits are all American. If the One China Policy is ended then China would lose face, something that no Chinese leader is keen to endure. It might also encourage instability in some of China’s currently “non rebellious” provinces. Trump has already resolved to adjust what he sees as unfavourable trading relations with China, what he has done now is given himself and extra bargaining chip and doing so for free. The chip doesn’t even need to be played, and probably shouldn’t be played, but nevertheless remains in play.
Trump’s One China Gambit, gives an insight into how he will make Mexico pay for “The Wall”. He has definitely mastered the art of using absolutely nothing as leverage. All I can say is that I wish that my own country had a leader with such gifts and such commitment to the national interest. But, you never know, Theresa May could still surprise us in her dealings with the EU!
Trump is showing he can play the game that China and Russia have themselves played and perfected over the years, and to do so with equal or perhaps even superior skill.
cjknowles1972 
