Gordon G. Chang - Wikipedia
Gordon G. Chang
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The neutrality of the style of writing in this article is questioned. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (January 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Gordon G. Chang
Born Gordon Guthrie Chang
1951 (age 66–67)
Occupation lawyer, author, television commentator, speaker
Spouse(s) Lydia Tam
Website Official website
Gordon Guthrie Chang (Chinese: 章家敦; pinyin: Zhāng Jiādūn; born 1951) is an American columnist, blogger, television pundit, author and lawyer.[1] He is widely known for his book The Coming Collapse of China (2001), in which he argued that the hidden nonperforming loans of the "Big Four" Chinese State banks would likely bring down China's financial system and its communist government.
Chang has claimed that the Chinese government would collapse in 2006, 2011, 2012, 2016, and 2017. Critics say that Chang destroyed his own credibility by making wrong predictions repeatedly.[2][3][4]
In Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes on the World (2006), Chang suggests that North Korea is most likely to target Japan, not South Korea. Chang suggests that North Korean nuclear ambitions could be forestalled if there were concerted multinational diplomacy, with some "limits to patience" backed up by threat of an all-out Korean war.
Chang is also a contributor at The Daily Beast.[5]
Biography[edit]
Chang was born to a Chinese father and an American mother of Scottish ancestry.[6][7] His father is from Rugao, Jiangsu, China.[8] Chang graduated from Columbia High School, Maplewood, New Jersey, in 1969, and served as class president in his senior year. Four years later, he graduated from Cornell University, where he was a member of the Quill and Dagger society, and graduated from the Cornell Law School in 1976.
He is a regular contributor to The John Batchelor Show, The Glenn Beck Program on Fox News, and CNN. He appeared as a special guest on Comedy Central's The Daily Showwith Jon Stewart on July 17, 2006. On February 3, 2010, he appeared on Al Jazeera English and argued that China does not have a lot of economic leverage over the United States. On November 24, 2010, he appeared on Imus in the Morning to discuss the Yeonpyeong artillery duel.
Chang continues to maintain that China is on the brink of collapse and that the people are one step away from revolution.[9] Chang also argues that China is a "new dot-com bubble", adding that the rapid growth by China is not supported by various internal factors such as decrease in population growth as well as slowing retail sales.[10] In a separate interview, he remarked that China achieved its 149.2 percent of its current trade surplus with the United States through "lying, cheating, and stealing" and that if China decided to realize its threat that had been expressed since August 2007 to sell its US Treasuries, it would actually hurt its own economy which is reliant on exports to the United States; the economy of the United States would be hurt by a sell-off of Treasuries, causing the United States to buy less from China, which would in turn hurt the Chinese economy.[11]
Chang often criticized South Korea's pro-North Korean measures during President Moon Jae-in's term. Chang harshly criticized Moon Jae-in, calling him "dangerous" and arguing that Moon should be considered as a "North Korea's agent."[12] Chang also asserted that Moon Jae-in is "subverting freedom, democracy, and South Korea."[12]
References[edit]
Jump up^ "Author bio". gordonchang.com.
Jump up^ "The Coming Collapse of China: 2012 Edition" – via Foreign Policy.
Jump up^ "China's Collapse Is Coming, More So Now Than Ever - Gordon Chang -2016".
Jump up^ "Chang's predictions of China's collapse destroy his own credibility".
Jump up^ "Author Page Gordon Chang". thedailybeast.com. The Daily Beast. Retrieved October 23, 2017.
Jump up^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNwt2DGshpw
Jump up^ "章家敦︰中共崩溃瞬息间 - 大纪元". 4 April 2012.
Jump up^ Chang, Gordon G. "$3.9 Trillion Of Local Gov Debt In China . . . And Counting".
Jump up^ "US rejects China Dalai Lama warning". Al Jazeera English. 2010-02-03. Retrieved 2010-02-03.
Jump up^ Jeff Macke (2011-06-24). "China Is The New Dot-Com Bubble: Gordon Chang". Yahoo! Finance.
Jump up^ "Chinese Piracy Costs US 1 Million Jobs: Gordon Chang". Yahoo! Finance. 2011-06-27.
^ Jump up to:a b "Gordon G. Chang on Twitter (Archived)". Gordon G. Chang. 2018-10-29. Retrieved 2018-10-29.
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Gordon G. Chang.Gordon Chang's web site
"Kim Jong-il will create crisis, China will step in and solve it", Gordon Chang interview to Venkatesan Vembu, Daily News & Analysis, 20 June 2006
Appearances on C-SPAN
“So what is being Quaker except an encounter?”
Over the last few months, I have found myself asking this same question.
The sense of responding to something either within or without, or to an event, and wanting to respond; to reciprocate; IS the encounter that many Quakers talk about experiencing/seeking to have in Meeting for Worship, though it is an encounter that happens everywhere and anywhere in ones life.
Quakers has historically been seen as and sees itself as a less institutionalised “church” compared to the mainstream/establishment churches/religions. And this is true to a large extent. But there is a longing for a creedal culture and an insecurity for lack of institutional religion among Quakers.
In the UK, Quaker meetings have a high percentage of so called refugees from mainstream institutional religions – Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Catholics, Jews, Buddhists. Many of them mourn the loss of the creedal rituals that provided the superstructure and holding of their previous religious communities. In the last 25 – 50 years, British Quakers have transitioned from being largely a “church” born into the faith to being a “church” of convinced adults. This means most of us have developed a relationship to and/or an understanding of the divine, god, religion, etc, independent of Quakers or organised religion. If Quakers were to strip away the trappings of state and Christendom – the institutional stranglehold of “The Proper Channels”- and if Quakers finally let go of creedal envy and fixed forms of worship then we could experience that which holds us together. To experience social organisation as a support for intimate relationships, not as a barrier to them. I think Quakers have a greater chance of achieving this than the mainstream churches. I enjoy singing, Bach, requiem mass, Jamaican Reggae, Black American Jazz, Jewish liturgical chanting. I appreciate the radicalism of Jesus the Jewish heretic. I am nurtured in the collective silence of Quaker waiting. I have not been brought up in any of these traditions, but I appreciate them and they resonate with me and in me, they are human expressions of being here, being alive, being human. They are expressions of people responding to these encounters and wanting to express it, respond and reciprocate. Being Quaker is living out of these events.
However I doubt modern quakerism would satisfy Alain. Alain points out the atmosphere religious art within churches, Buddhist temples etc., helps to bring about a certain mood. The plain Quaker house with its bare walls though not artisitic in lets say a catholic sense has a certain spiritual charm with a strong appeal. Too many Quaker houses these days it seems to me, are more akin to secualr civic centres with unnecessary landscape art, etc.
What would appeal to Alain I can imagine is that there is no creed formula or doctrines one is obliged to believe (this appealed to me). The silent worship would appeal. Many of the beautiful early quaker writings (and some modern ones especially found in the quaker faith and practice) would no doubt impress him (I’d hope so anyway).
But it seems Quakerism is a word that has little meaning. I mean that ‘Quaker’ can mean whatever you want it to mean as long as you attach in a vague broad way words like ‘justice’ ‘peace’ ‘simplicity’ etc. One can say that they are not christian yet still claim to be quaker. I know quakers who say they are buddhist because they are it seems to me so embarassed by being identified with our ancestral christian elements. Quakers who originally believed they were the ‘true christian sect’ against the world have over the three hundred years grown almost ashamed to admit they are a christian sect and have christian roots.
I dont believe that this means we all have to revert to traditional christian beliefs and not allow ourselves to grow on the bread other religious traditions have to offer but it would be good to see us westerners of a western traditional spiritual sect have a little more pride of our native religion.
Once after a quaker meeting (when I was very new to the quakers) I asked what the quaker take of ‘sin’ is. I was simply told it depended which quaker I asked. While I admire the openess it would have been nice nevertheless to have been told at least traditionally their view. Too many of us dont know the quaker stance when it comes to heaven, hell, the trinity etc. Not that these things need be believed but at least well known so we can have a better definate understanding of where the early quakers came from and where we truly stand in relation to them, and so when people ask us about Quakerism we can sound more grounded in our heritage. Otherwise we are just going to end up a loose spiritual/philosophic forum with catch phrases (i.e That of God in every one) and nice silence.