Yao Ming: Wax On, Wax Off
May 3, 2006 by Angelo Fernandez
Filed under NBA Basketball
Houston Rockets star Yao Ming has a wax figure in the Madame Tussauds Shanghai, a recently opened wax museum in Shanghai, China. Yao Ming’s wax figure is joined by other famous celebrities such as Bill Gates, Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise.
It’s only fitting that Yao Ming was given this honor as he carries with him the face of China in the NBA. He has the makings of one of China’s biggest diplomats to the world, playing as a Star for a now globalized NBA, who reaches to many many countries across the globe.
It’s really funny how China can still claim they’re a communist country when you see the western capitalist influences pouring in. Tom Cruise? Brad Pitt?
“t’s really funny how China can still claim they’re a communist country when you see the western capitalist influences pouring in. Tom Cruise? Brad Pitt?”
You know nothing about politics. You should talk about NBA，not wether China is a communist country.
“You know nothing about politics. You should talk about NBA，not wether China is a communist country.”
What makes you say I don’t know anything about politics? You don’t even know me to make that kind of remark. I find that comment insulting. And it’s my blog and I can write about whatever I want. The post afterall is about an NBA player.
You believe people of a communist country have no right to like Brad Pitt?
Your attitude is too parochial.
That’s not what I said. A communist country would instinctively be opposed to a capitalist culture, as it goes against they’re ideology. The fact that they do allow such things to come in (you can see it everywhere i.e. Mcdonalds etc) is the irony of things.
The truth is China is a very capitalist country, where Communism only appears in their philosophy of governance – the state is supreme.
I am sorry for saying “You know nothing about politics.” But the fact is you conceive prejudices.
“You believe people of a communist country have no right to like Brad Pitt?
Your attitude is too parochial.”
Not so much parochial as it exposes an inherent irony in Chinese communism. Theres a reason why the communist regime in China began with a Cultural Revolution: all western influences were destroyed. Why? They wanted to retain only the purest form of Chinese culture as an act of defiance against the dominant hegemony of the West.
Your concern, linxco, is probably best linked towards PC (political correctness) concerns. For those who don’t know what political correctness advocates, put simply: articles must not carry any political nor ideological bias. This bias normally comes from selective usage of language, usage of facts out of context, and distortions of the facts themselves.
I don’t think it’s a PC issue to begin with as the comment the author put down is a fact: Chinese mainlanders are now adoring Western influences they tried so hard to eradicate. Nothing was distorted.
He did not make a statement against communism. He did not make a statement against the Chinese government. He pointed out an irony. What’s so un-PC about that? Fact, no matter how cruel or silly, is fact.
“But the fact is you conceive prejudices.”
How so? I never said anything prejudiced. You missed my point entirely. I’m not against Chinese people liking Brad Pitt or anything from a foreign culture.
I was just stating an irony. It’s a fact about Chinese culture but it’s ironic.
A communist country would instinctively be opposed to a capitalist culture.
What is capitalist culture? Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt is capitalist culture?
Yes. Everything about Hollywood and the people in them are products of a capitalist culture.
Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt are capitalist-linked. They are products of the capitalist hegemony of America. They are not so much capitalists themselves, but as mentioned, anything even remotely linked to capitalism was considered in need of destruction back in Mao’s China.
What is Capitalism? It is the evolution of mercantilism borne out of Europe. In the simplest definition, it demands that economies be run privately by individuals–which is not problematic per se. The trouble begins when private individuals cross moral lines and pursue unethical means of making wealth. Pure capitalism does not favor government intervention. America now is actually a mixed-system since government controls are present.
Marxists fundamentally linked capitalism to the burgeoise. In a society with limited government control, wealth distribution becomes rather skewed towards the upper-class and not the proletariat since the minority elite control the means of production even if they don’t produce themselves.
Hence, in communist nations capitalism is equated with the hegemony of the burgeoise. This is of course not totally true, capitalism itself is much more than that, but it became a classic case of taking facts out of context and distorting them to fit one’s needs. Unfortunately, this devolved further into the belief that anything that promotes unequal wealth distribution is burgeoise and therefore capitalist. America is viewed this way since you got to admit, it has a very big say on world policy and can influence–even subvert–the United Nations’ policies with impunity.
Are these actors themselves capitalists in the sense that they oppose communism directly? No. but it’s what they stand for that’s the problem. When people think Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, they think America. At least that’s what its like for foreigners. I’m not too sure if you’re an American or not. I can tell you for a fact that to foreigners, Americans in general symbolize America the nation and all of its ideals–capitalism included. Whether you like that or not, it is the perception.
Of course that is not right. Not all Americans are capitalists. It just so happened that majority of america has been linked to communism. So has Hollywood. Ronald Reagan’s ascent into the presidency also put Hollywood and the media into a position versus communism in General.
Hence, Cruise and Pitt likewise came to symbolize the capitalist tendencies of their motherland.