Hi everyone.
A little bit of a follow up to my questions on new religous movements the
other day. Have people been following the saga of Falun Gong (a new
religous movement in China, a blend of traditional Chinese and western New
Age ideas run by a US-based Chinese expat) and the Chinese government?
Several interesting things come out of it...
1. Many in the western media seem to be following the usual historicist
line on these things (much as they do when arguing about 'centuries of
ethnic hatred' etc in the Balkans). In this case it is argues that Falun
Gong is a movement like the Taiping or Boxer rebellion, merely an aspect of
some 'inscrutable' Chinese character, something that comes out of being
Chinese (or 'Oriental'), rather than a phenomenum intimately bound up with
specific hstorical and contemporary ciurcumstances of the current movement
towards controlled capitalism that the Chinese leadership is promoting, and
the current intelligence struggle between China and the US.
2. The media can't seem to decide whether Falun Gong should be
characterised as another 'mad religous cult', a la Aum Shrinrikyo or
Peoples' Temple, and therefore attacked; or whether it should supported as
a demonstation of freedom of religion.
3. The Chinese government is obviously worried about Falun Gong. Why is
this? Well, it is very large; total membership is unknown, but there are
estimates from 1 Million upwards. Many Communist Party members are also
members of Falun Gong. Obviously there is a fear of the Party structure adn
organisation being subverted. But is the fear more than simply one of
internal trouble?
Here is a possibility: Falun Gong is run by a US-based millionaire; Falun
Gong has arisen very recently and remarkably quickly; Falun Gong followers
appear unaffected by the crackdown on public demonstrations etc after
Tiananmen - they are very fond of demonstating for recognition; Falun
Gong's precepts are vague but directed generally towards individual
salvation through meditation and exercise, with the promise of personal
power - it is thus carefully constructed to use traditional and
contemporary 'Chinese' elements directed towards 'American' style goals;
hardline elements of the US state are at present trying to discredit the
Chinese administration (the nuclear spy scandal, possibly the Belgrade
embassy bombing etc.), some have suggested witht the aim of promoting a new
'Cold War', in order to (amongst other aims) increase military and
intelligence budgets etc. Put these things together and the movement has
all the elements of a classic CIA destabilisation campaign.
Does this sound possible? Does anyone else have a more conventional
explanation?
David.
____________________________________________________________________
David Wood
PhD Research Student ('Intelligence Sites in Rural North Yorkshire')
Centre for Rural Economy
Department of Agricultural Economics and Food Marketing
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 7RU
0191 222 5305
[log in to unmask]
____________________________________________________________________
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|