[crush-n-spread]

Jackie is Chinese. He ought to be pro-China. In the WaPo article you linked, he says the following:

  If our own countrymen don’t support our country, 
  who will support our country? We know our country 
  has many problems. We [can] talk about it when the 
  door is closed. To outsiders, [we should say] “our 
  country is the best.”

and

  Seriously, I am always like, when the door is 
  closed, “Our country is like this and this. Who 
  and who is not good.” But outside, “Our country 
  is the best, like so and so, is the best.” You 
  cannot say our country has problems [when you are
  outside], like “Yes, our country is bad.”

Can you fault him for that? Perhaps it is the American standard that is wrong. Perhaps it is wrong to talk poorly of your own state on the global stage. Just because Americans (who own the fruits of 70-odd years of global dominance) are willing to disparage their country to no end, does not mean that it should be a standard for everyone.

t. Canadian

[dragonwriter]

> Can you fault him for that?

Yes; while the attitude is extremely common, and not just when it comes to nations, it's an attitude that serves as a powerful enabler of evil in every context in which it is found, whether national, family, corporate, partisan, religious, or otherwise, and it should emphatically be condemned every time it rears its ugly head.

> Perhaps it is the American standard that is wrong.

Americans are no less prone to this than others.

[crush-n-spread]

You claim that having solidarity with your nation, family, corporation, etc. is an enabler of evil. But what you see as evil probably looks a lot like dominance, control and strength to the rest of the world.

Ultimately, national power is extremely valuable on the global stage. Every single industrial nation on Earth has tens of thousands of business leaders and decision makers working to usurp that power from other nations as their own; this must be known and acknowledged! Whether it be exploitative trade agreements or owning parts of a neighbouring country's industry, to have control and dominance over other nations and their diverse varieties of resources is what wars are fought over.

Thus, if Americans do not seek to solidify their dominance at every moment, their dominance will be taken from them at some point; of this we can be sure. We _must_ have solidarity. It is not an enabler of evil - rather, it protects us from the evils that others might inflict upon us. Because that's how the world works. We fight over resources.

[dragonwriter]

> You claim that having solidarity with your nation, family, corporation, etc. is an enabler of evil.

No, I claim that refusing to ackniwledge and criticize evil by members of your family, nation, corporation, etc. around outsiders is an enabler of evil. Solidarity doesn't require that.

[coldtea]

>Americans are no less prone to this than others

No, they tend to think that their farts don't smell -- and that being pro-China as a Chinese is somehow worse than being pro-US as an American.

[dragonwriter]

> No, they tend to think that their farts don't smell

Some of them might, plenty of them—like Chan—don't believe anyone should criticize America where outsiders can see (of course, it's hard to tell those attitudes apart in either country, since the outward expression of the latter is also a convenient cover for the former.)

[0xcde4c3db]

> Just because Americans (who own the fruits of 70-odd years of global dominance) are willing to disparage their country to no end

It's more that Americans do not necessarily consider open criticism of government leaders and policy to be "disparaging our country". Many consider it unpatriotic to not voice such criticism if you honestly believe that something is wrong.

[pcr0]

Nothing wrong with being proud of one's nationality or country.

Jackie Chan on the other hand is against free speech, thinks Chinese people can't handle freedom and that they need to be controlled for their own good.

[coldtea]

Aren't all those things the particular American idea of what government should be?

Why should the Chinese agree with it?

Because of the white man's burden? Or because some countries think their way (e.g. related to how to govern etc) is the only way? China has millennia old tradition and preference for a confucianism in government, where it's all about cohesion and harmony.

[Gigablah]

Doesn't sound particularly controversial. I've heard dafter things from American politicians and celebrities.

[rebuilder]

What's with this idea that an accident of birth must determine which flag owns you?

[coldtea]

What's with this idea that the country that nurtured you, and the culture that you were raised in, and where you live, is some "accident of birth"?

You can always immigrate.

But even for immigrants, their native country, if they spend their formative years there, is not some mere "accident of birth", anymore than your family is or your kid is (after all what is a kid? Some accident of birth as well, could have made another kid with another person -- not to mention who your spouse is among 8 billion is an "accident of meeting", etc)

[BeetleB]

>You can always immigrate.

Not easily. Many countries are openly hostile to immigration, and do not even have a path to legal immigration.

[titanix2]

Good luck applying any law without a state and a defined jurisdiction.

[rebuilder]

Yes, very true. I was responding to the idea that a person should be patriotic, though. Although in Mr. Chan's case, surely that would imply he should be pro-Hong Kong, whatever that means...

[sinnoh]

There are few secrets on the world stage. Pretending like your country doesn't have issues makes you sound either foolish or brainwashed.

Not so much "the American standard" as it is basic logic.

[rb666]

What a terrible way to think. You also feel Germans cannot be faulted for supporting the Nazis, just because they are German?

[crush-n-spread]

Wait a second. In the quotes I took of Jackie, he says that he is critical of Japan behind closed doors. Your Nazi comparison holds no water.