Talk:Zhao Ziyang

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Zhao Ziyang is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
February 5, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

The wording of market-oriented was a fair description because it means supply and demand are determined by the market, as supposed to by command. (look up market-oriented economy) --空向 00:52, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Huh? China and the US have two different *production* systems. In the US capitalists determine production, in China, the CCP determines production. The markets are the same, one goes down to the store and exchanges yuan or dollars for the commodity. What is the difference between the markets? How production decisions are made are the only difference. Ruy Lopez 04:25, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Ruy, update your info... what you say about China dates back to the Cold War... olivier 17:41, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] dead?

[1] It sound like he is dead, but more information is definately needed before an entry. Not a good idea killing a living person

Dead now. Xinhua-confirmed KittySaturn 02:16, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)

[edit] Do not use Wade-Giles

For a subject as young as Zhao Ziyang, the use of Wade-Giles is almost non-existent. It makes sense to list Wade-Giles for older subjects such as Chou Enlai, but no one uses "Chao Tzu-yang". I don't care if a blood-drenched dictatorship created pinyin. Everyone is using it. Wikipedia is not for political activism. --Jiang 02:36, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I HAVE seen material written in his active career that referred to him in Wade-Giles.If Wikipedia is not for political activism,Chiang,then those of us who dissent from the "everyone" who use pinyin have a right under NPOV rules to see our preferred forms listed as alternatives.It's not like I'm moving the article to the W-G name,though any reference book I was in charge of most certainly would.

Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 03:06, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
It's not an npov issue. It's about leaving useful information in and unuseful information out. Who still uses Wade-Giles? Maybe for Mao Tse-tung they do, but not for Chiang Tse-min. Having simplified, traditional, pinyin, birthdate, deathdate, etc is enough to overwhelm people on the first line. --Jiang 03:46, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can you explain this pinyin/Wade-Giles thing to me, is this why Tao is now Dao. I was so confused I thought there were two different Chinese Religion*/Philosophy*/School of Though* (*Delete appropriate). I hate it when they go and do this to me. Its just like A.D. becoming A.C.E. when did that happen? Why did I not get the email. Can you dump some info on my own page if you get time.--Sgt Howie 16:45, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The articles on Daoism-Taoism Romanization issue, pinyin, Wade-Giles, and Chinese language may answer your question. --Jiang 03:46, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] media writing class

If I were to want to say the name Zhao Ziyang, how would I go about pronouncing it? anyone know??

Thanks

It's pronounced [t͡ʂɑʊ˥˩ t͡sI˨˩˦.jɑŋ˧˥] in Chinese - the closest English approximation is "Jao Dz-yahng" (Sorry, an exact rendering of this pronounciation using English phonemes is impossible, because it contains several sounds not found in English.).

[edit] "sexism"

Bk0 has repeatedly reverted the statement "He is survived by his second wife, Liang Boqi, four sons, and a daughter" by "He is survived by his second wife, Liang Boqi, and his five children" calling the former "anachronistic sexism". So Bk0, please conduct your crusade somewhere else. These are FACTS. His daughter has been quoted in the press several times. It would be far better to have her name here, but short of that, knowing that he had only one daughter surviving is a valuable piece of information: readers can learn here that the person referred to as "his daughter" is always the same person, and that the press did actually not imply "one of his daughters". So whatever you will read said by "his daughter" was always said by the same person, no matter whether she is male or female. If you have issues with sexism, then please go and fight in the relevant articles or in a dedicated blog, but please don't mess with the memory of Zhao Ziyang. olivier 18:51, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)

The original wording of the sentence was (and currently is) rather sexist in that the genders of his children are mostly irrelevant but is the only information given. Also, the wording "...four sons, and a daughter" is strongly suggestive of the traditional sexism apparent in many societies including Asian ones (ie, "four important children, and also a daughter"). I would not object to the wording being changed to something like: "He is survived by...five children (a daughter and four sons).". I think that preserves the gender information you seem to care so much about while softening the sexist overtones somewhat. -- Bk0 20:19, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The obvious truth is that genders exist and should not be whitewashed. If the order of listing is a problem, then let's look into the ages of the children. Who is the youngest? Change it to "He is survived by...five children (a daughter and four sons)." if you like, but any destruction of relevant information, will be reverted.--Jiang 20:48, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Come again?"

In Hong Kong, 10,000-15,000 people went to the candlelight vigil of Zhao. The mainlanders such as Chen Juoyi said that it was illegal for any Hong Kong legislators to join any farewell ceremony "because under the 'one country, two systems' Hong Kong legislator cannot care anything about mainland." The statement caused a political storm in Hong Kong for three days after his speech. Szeto Wah, the chairman of The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China, said that it was not right for the Communists to depress the memorial ceremony. The twenty-four pan-democrat legislators went against the chairperson of the Legco, insisting that security be tightened at Tiananmen Square and at Zhao's house, and that the authorities try to prevent any public displays of grief.

This paragraph seems a bit confusing not in its content but how it's written. Can anyone who's knowledgable of the response in Hong Kong rewrite this? And should the story about the legislators walking out of LegCo be added?--64.231.227.216 23:15, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] To John Smith re: funerary arrangements

You are right in that previous leaders had "bells and whistles".

However, the reason that Zhao Ziyang did not have an elaborate funeral was, at least according to the CPC, that funerary arrangements had been streamlined in the early 1990's so that state funerals were no longer held, and a brief farewell ceremony is instead held. Zhao was the first former head of government to die after this new arrangement came in.

Read into that what you will (personally I think they put in the arrangements so that they'll avoid 1989-style public mourning that escalate into unrest), but that is the official policy.

Hope that clears things up for you. --Sumple (Talk) 22:29, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I hope you don't mind me putting a little caveat to that affect in. John Smith's 22:34, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Yep that would be nice. =) --Sumple (Talk) 22:36, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Section removed from article

"This process was illegal under the PRC's constitution, as the National People's Congress was not in session. Legally, only it could dismiss him. The fact that he was removed in this way is one major reason why he was not rehabilitated after his death, as well as why the Tiananmen protestors are still officially labelled as criminals by the PRC government. If the CPC admitted that its handling of Tiananmen was wrong, it would have to address the unconstitutional removal of Zhao from power. If they admit that this action was illegal, the politicians who carried it out would be guilty of treason - Jiang Zemin included."

I've removed this section because it is blatantly untrue. Zhao was General Secretary of the Communist Party, not a state organ, despite the reality. Removal of its General Secretary does not require approval of the NPC. Zhao was not the President.

I've retained the section on this talk page, however, because something should be said about the fact that the transition to Jiang was illegitimate, and that Jiang was "eating human blood buns", as the Chinese saying goes. --Sumple (Talk) 11:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] someone on the Chinese site deleted my addition

I started a new section named as "under surveillance until death" which was basically what I wrote here. then immediatly it was put under protection by the chinese moderator louer. so I can't change it any more. This is what I wrote earlier which was deleted by user az1568 more than three times.

[edit] the chinese communists are taking over the chinese page

the communists blocked their people's access to wikipedia. and all of sudden, it seems that they unblocked it according to some people. some still can't get connected to zh.wikipedia.org

now it may seem to be nice. however, let's think it hard. why would they continue to block other web sites and only unblock this web site? The only way they will do it is because they now have control of this chinese wikipedia web site by putting their own spies into this system.

so far, they have deleted several articles, blocked many articles such as the "two China", "the treaty b/w Russian and China's borders", etc. and if you go read about the Tibet article, it did not mention anything about how the communists invaded tibet in 1949. over all, that web site is completely pro chinese communists, it is as if that whole web site is singing love songs for the chinese communists!

it simply doesn't make sense why there are mainland Chinese volunteerring for that site, when the chinese government blocked its access. normal people certainly won't be able to connect to the zh.wikipedia.org at all. and it even advertises for people to meet in chinese cities. we know chinese cops spy on their people's "illegal" activities. so you think that the chinese cops will allow its people to gather to talk about wikipedia which is a blocked site?!

someone should take some actions to make sure that chinese communist spies are not taking over that site.

  • Why do you think they are spies, but not normal Chinese citizens? Wiki has been unblocked on and off in China. and if you are wrong, you are doing nothing but denying the Chinese people's freedom of speech on subjects related to mainland China.*
don't be stupid, blocking the website DOES NOT prevent their spies from editing wikipedia. so there is no point UNBLOCKING it just to send spy in. go learn more about computer science before making claims that doesn't even make sense to any programmer.. !_! as for why it is unblock, i think you should go read what chinese think about western media now. Akinkhoo (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Rise to Power and Guangdong Years

The opening paragraph has Mr. Zhao as a very early reformer, but that isn't necessarily the case. To wit, Chao was ardently leftist and, since August 6, 1951, assistant head of the Land Reform Committee as well as secretary general of the Party [Central South] Sub-Bureau just as Tu [Jun-sheng] was leftist, assistant head of the Central-South Party Bureau. [1]

Other early years background: Zhao worked directly under Tao Zhu for most of his time in Guangdong, first leading inspection teams looking at land reform in 1952.[2] Tao later purged the Guangdong party leadership, and Zhao took the lead in Northern Guangdong in April-June 1952, where over 1,000 party cadres were removed from office. [3] Among those who had to apologize for mistakes (and left Guangdong shortly thereafter) was Marshal Ye Jianying. Zhao became Guangdong CCP Secretary General in about 1953, and Provincial Party First Secretary in 1965, before being purged in the Great Proletariat Cultural Revolution (GPCR).

Economic policy in Guangdong reflected national trends. Free agricultural surplus markets were reopened in the fall of 1956, and Zhao is quoted as saying Rich and middle peasants outside cooperatives take advantage of the slackness in management . . . to engage in private business . . . The Anti-Rightist Campaign began in mid-1957, followed by the Socialist Education Campaign and communization. In December 1958, Zhou told other provincial leaders to moderate policies toward peasants, particularly in communal property and meals. [4]

Tao and Zhao had a wild ride during the GPCR. In May 1966, Tao Zhu was promoted to No. 4 in the party, behind Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai and Lin Biao. That allowed Zhao Ziyang to take over as head of Guangdong province. Tao and Zhao were among the most enthusiastic of the early pro-Red Guard CCP leaders, but quickly fell from power because they tried to control the excesses of the leftists. [5] By early 1967, both men were out of power. DOR (HK) (talk) 10:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

This is just flat wrong: As a supporter of the reforms of Liu Shaoqi, he was dismissed as Guangdong party leader in 1967 during the Cultural Revolution, . . . Zhao was purged because his patron, Tao Zhu, No. 4 in the party, fell from power. DOR (HK) (talk) 09:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)