Chinese woman sentenced to 1 year of 're-education' on her wedding day for re-tweeting a joke on Twitter

[Rosbjerg]

In spite of tremendous economic growth, China is still per capita one of the poorest nations on earth. I have to think that it's impossible to have a modern society while maintaining dictatorship and repression, thus I hope eventually the pressure for reform will become irresistible.

 

Eventually it will - it always does, when millions of voices demand to be heard.

That's a very optimistic outlook.

Countries like Saudi Arabia show that wealth and modernization of society does not necessarily lead to a rise in democratic tendencies.

 

Woops, I misunderstood WoD. What I meant was that culture and power always change over time - especially when more and more people demands to be heard.. I didn't mean to imply that this change is always for the better.

[Humodour]

Right now it feels like there's probably more verbal freedom in China than there is in the US in terms of discussion of violence.

 

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Go on, fly to China, try and stay there for a while and discuss or encourage violence or terrorism. They aren't even ****ing allowed to see skeletons in computer games.

 

Honestly, if you think the West cracks down hard on potential terrorism, you obviously haven't seen how China deals with it. Terrorism to the Chinese government is every bit of a threat to their 'social order' as democracy because they have so many ethnic groups they treat like **** and thus want independence - some of which would like to follow the IRA's footsteps to achieve it.

[Calax]

Right now it feels like there's probably more verbal freedom in China than there is in the US in terms of discussion of violence.

 

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Go on, fly to China, try and stay there for a while and discuss or encourage violence or terrorism. They aren't even ****ing allowed to see skeletons in computer games.

 

Honestly, if you think the West cracks down hard on potential terrorism, you obviously haven't seen how China deals with it. Terrorism to the Chinese government is every bit of a threat to their 'social order' as democracy because they have so many ethnic groups they treat like **** and thus want independence - some of which would like to follow the IRA's footsteps to achieve it.

Define 'potential terrorism'

 

It seems like between the two nations there are drastically different definitions, both draconian in their own ways, and more extreme than the other.

[mkreku]

They aren't even ****ing allowed to see skeletons in computer games.

Isn't Australia the country where every second game becomes banned?

 

How many nipples do you see in American games?

 

Try finding a game where you can hurt children in Germany.

 

---

 

Media loves painting China as a super-oppressed country where you can't do anything out of fear of the government. But I have a friend who moved there two years ago and what he is telling me does not reflect this at all. The common Chinese person has the exact same worries and problems as the rest of us, no more no less. They worry about the economy, they think their country is the best in the world and they cheer their favourite sports team. Just like everyone else.

[Orogun01]

Right now it feels like there's probably more verbal freedom in China than there is in the US in terms of discussion of violence. Deciding they're worse because your only exposure to their lifestyle is the Media which is decidedly anti-china is a bit short sighted.

And this is the last post of Calax before the US police drags him to a labor camp

[Gorgon]

In spite of tremendous economic growth, China is still per capita one of the poorest nations on earth. I have to think that it's impossible to have a modern society while maintaining dictatorship and repression, thus I hope eventually the pressure for reform will become irresistible.

 

Eventually it will - it always does, when millions of voices demand to be heard.

What happens when billions of people don't really care enough to make a fuss though..

[Walsingham]

"I'm buck nekkid!"

 

 

Censorship doesn't mean suddenly we're Nazis. FFS.

[Hiro Protagonist]

Right now it feels like there's probably more verbal freedom in China than there is in the US in terms of discussion of violence.

 

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Go on, fly to China, try and stay there for a while and discuss or encourage violence or terrorism.

 

You can discuss violence and terrorism. I know because I went to China last year and did just that with people there. However, I don't understand why you would want to encourage violence and terrorism.

[Hiro Protagonist]

Media loves painting China as a super-oppressed country where you can't do anything out of fear of the government. But I have a friend who moved there two years ago and what he is telling me does not reflect this at all. The common Chinese person has the exact same worries and problems as the rest of us, no more no less. They worry about the economy, they think their country is the best in the world and they cheer their favourite sports team. Just like everyone else.

 

Pretty much my experience there.

[RPGmasterBoo]

In spite of tremendous economic growth, China is still per capita one of the poorest nations on earth. I have to think that it's impossible to have a modern society while maintaining dictatorship and repression, thus I hope eventually the pressure for reform will become irresistible.

 

Eventually it will - it always does, when millions of voices demand to be heard.

What happens when billions of people don't really care enough to make a fuss though..

 

Exactly. They can't seem to look at it from any perspective other than their own.

 

At its core is the belief that their values are the best and desired by everyone. Which they're not.

 

There's no "repression and dictatorship" in China. It is China - the only way to organize the coexistence of such a large number of diverse people. The political system there is not something sent from mars - its evolved and adapted from the realities of Chinese life over the post-Mao decades, and I doubt anyone but the extremist minorities and the US/EU funded human rights soldiers and their cohorts is screaming bloody murder over it.

 

I challenge anyone to show me a period in Chinese history when China resembled anything close to a western democracy.

Also, considering China's internal problems - decentralization and a sudden shift to democracy would be tantamount to suicide.

[pmp10]

There's no "repression and dictatorship" in China.

I'll agree as to dictatorship as technically the power rests with the party but the state is definitely authoritarian.

As to repressive - it sees fit to ban even such a trivial service as twitter. China attitude regarding various websites certainly leads to it being labeled as such.

 

It is China - the only way to organize the coexistence of such a large number of diverse people. The political system there is not something sent from mars - its evolved and adapted from the realities of Chinese life over the post-Mao decades, and I doubt anyone but the extremist minorities and the US/EU funded human rights soldiers and their cohorts is screaming bloody murder over it.

By that reasoning Russia should still be an absolute monarchy or in the very least a dictatorship.

The political system found there didn't so much evolve as was a result of communist party victory in a civil war. There was no predisposition towards it. Chinese people had just as much experience in democracy as they had in communism.

I challenge anyone to show me a period in Chinese history when China resembled anything close to a western democracy.

Also, considering China's internal problems - decentralization and a sudden shift to democracy would be tantamount to suicide.

People Republic of China came into existence some time before communist takeover.

Despite the fact that it's power is now limited to Taiwan it's laws and institutions are similar to what you would find in a western democracy.

As for decentralization - federalism has been made to work for some states.

It would have to be shown why would it be a certain failure in the case of China.

[Walsingham]

pmp10. You make an interesting (if debateable) point about Russia. However, it's slightly disingenuous to claim that Chiang Kai Shek's Nationalists ran a viable alternative to dictatorship across the whole of China.

[RPGmasterBoo]

The point is this: the political system China has now rests squarely in the tradition of the sort of governments seen all over asia. Its strict, conservative with a strong emphasis on work and subordination to authority.

Its the product of a specific culture and mindset seen throughout the region.

Anyone who thinks Japan and South Korea or any other US client are hugely different is kidding themselves. The difference is in degrees.

 

The real issue is this. China has evolved from a regional power to a world power. The US and EU don't like that for obvious reasons. They are pushing for Chinese reform solely because that would make China more managable and hopefully easier to control.

The human rights talk is garbage.

If they cared about human rights they would reign in their favorite Saudi Arabian monarchy first. That's a state that thinks dismemberment is a good form of punishment.

 

The story of Chinese masses yearning for US sponsored freedom is a fantasy.

The reality is that China, along with Iran and a few other states are the handful of truly independent (from foreign influence) countries left in the world. That marks them as potential enemies in the eyes of the west. Media articles like these serve no other purpose than to undermine Chinese legitimacy, by pointing out government excess.

 

Since the US and EU are prone to the exact same excess, I don't see the point. In fact its laughable, as some people have pointed out.

[pmp10]

Its the product of a specific culture and mindset seen throughout the region.

Anyone who thinks Japan and South Korea or any other US client are hugely different is kidding themselves. The difference is in degrees.

75% of South Korea population are eligible voters.

80% in case of Japan.

China communist party membership consist of 5% of population.

I'd call that a significant difference.

 

The reality is that China, along with Iran and a few other states are the handful of truly independent (from foreign influence) countries left in the world.

Among the likes of North Korea population of which suffers chronic starvation and Somalia which is fighting it's second decade of civil war.

I don't see how it is a point in their favor.

Unless people are considered merely a resource to be extracted and spent as government deems fit some compromises to laws and institutions should be acceptable in order to keep your population fed.

 

That marks them as potential enemies in the eyes of the west. Media articles like these serve no other purpose than to undermine Chinese legitimacy, by pointing out government excess.

What you consider excess others percive as a consequential execution of ideological authoritarian policies.

The ones that deliberatly keep population from free access to information, ability to freely debate or pacefully demonstrate their opinions.

In short anything that may in any way threaten the ruling party.

[RPGmasterBoo]

In short, if its not your system - it has to suck, and the population is bound to hate it?

[Orogun01]

The point is this: the political system China has now rests squarely in the tradition of the sort of governments seen all over asia. Its strict, conservative with a strong emphasis on work and subordination to authority.

Its the product of a specific culture and mindset seen throughout the region.

Anyone who thinks Japan and South Korea or any other US client are hugely different is kidding themselves. The difference is in degrees.

 

The real issue is this. China has evolved from a regional power to a world power. The US and EU don't like that for obvious reasons. They are pushing for Chinese reform solely because that would make China more managable and hopefully easier to control.

The human rights talk is garbage.

If they cared about human rights they would reign in their favorite Saudi Arabian monarchy first. That's a state that thinks dismemberment is a good form of punishment.

 

The story of Chinese masses yearning for US sponsored freedom is a fantasy.

The reality is that China, along with Iran and a few other states are the handful of truly independent (from foreign influence) countries left in the world. That marks them as potential enemies in the eyes of the west. Media articles like these serve no other purpose than to undermine Chinese legitimacy, by pointing out government excess.

 

Since the US and EU are prone to the exact same excess, I don't see the point. In fact its laughable, as some people have pointed out.

I agree with you that China's political system should be authoritative, it's a cultural and historical fact that they do better under strong leadership.

The US and allied power is threatened by China; as they are by anything different from their views ever since the Cold War.

 

The problem with Communism is that is an expansionist government and an anti-capitalist movement, their main goal is to spread communism to the corners of the globe and "liberate" all the oppressed laborers under the capitalist yoke. It is therefore something to be threatened by even if the Chinese are only Communist in name and have a free enterprising society like our own.

As with any rising tensions and forthcoming conflict in our history; the press is the first to demonize the enemy and push for a conflict. As usual we wait until they deliver the first strike and unleash all of our fury (history repeating itself :sigh: )

 

Even though the fact remains that a woman was arrested for tweeting because it's considered political dissent. As someone who has experienced a Communist regime first hand I'll tell you that this is the sort of bull that tends to run the most. They watch you, they tell you what to think, and they'll bury you if you speak against them and call it "political dissent".

I would not be surprised if we found out that they are committing more atrocities inside these camps; it may not be reason enough to go to war but it's enough to pressure them into change.

[pmp10]

In short, if its not your system - it has to suck, and the population is bound to hate it?

In short, we believe you are oppressing your people and that's not right.

[RPGmasterBoo]

The point is this: the political system China has now rests squarely in the tradition of the sort of governments seen all over asia. Its strict, conservative with a strong emphasis on work and subordination to authority.

Its the product of a specific culture and mindset seen throughout the region.

Anyone who thinks Japan and South Korea or any other US client are hugely different is kidding themselves. The difference is in degrees.

 

The real issue is this. China has evolved from a regional power to a world power. The US and EU don't like that for obvious reasons. They are pushing for Chinese reform solely because that would make China more managable and hopefully easier to control.

The human rights talk is garbage.

If they cared about human rights they would reign in their favorite Saudi Arabian monarchy first. That's a state that thinks dismemberment is a good form of punishment.

 

The story of Chinese masses yearning for US sponsored freedom is a fantasy.

The reality is that China, along with Iran and a few other states are the handful of truly independent (from foreign influence) countries left in the world. That marks them as potential enemies in the eyes of the west. Media articles like these serve no other purpose than to undermine Chinese legitimacy, by pointing out government excess.

 

Since the US and EU are prone to the exact same excess, I don't see the point. In fact its laughable, as some people have pointed out.

I agree with you that China's political system should be authoritative, it's a cultural and historical fact that they do better under strong leadership.

The US and allied power is threatened by China; as they are by anything different from their views ever since the Cold War.

 

The problem with Communism is that is an expansionist government and an anti-capitalist movement, their main goal is to spread communism to the corners of the globe and "liberate" all the oppressed laborers under the capitalist yoke. It is therefore something to be threatened by even if the Chinese are only Communist in name and have a free enterprising society like our own.

As with any rising tensions and forthcoming conflict in our history; the press is the first to demonize the enemy and push for a conflict. As usual we wait until they deliver the first strike and unleash all of our fury (history repeating itself :sigh: )

 

Even though the fact remains that a woman was arrested for tweeting because it's considered political dissent. As someone who has experienced a Communist regime first hand I'll tell you that this is the sort of bull that tends to run the most. They watch you, they tell you what to think, and they'll bury you if you speak against them and call it "political dissent".

I would not be surprised if we found out that they are committing more atrocities inside these camps; it may not be reason enough to go to war but it's enough to pressure them into change.

 

Its a good observation that the Chinese are communist only in name. Kissinger noticed this a long time ago during his visits to China (when he was busy making anti soviet deals with Chinese leadership). You're wrong in thinking that communism is the threat here. China hasn't for a long time used any of the tactics that led the former SSSR to the grave (such as inspiring and financing revolutions worldwide).

In fact it has abandoned communist internationalism, in favor of economical dominance.

That is the real threat from the US/EU perspective, the fact that time is working in favor of the Chinese in every respect (in regards to the economy). The US is so dependent on China, that it cannot but feel threatened.

 

Yes, she was arrested for political dissent. On the other hand, if you've been in a formerly communist country that went through one of the various soft revolutions, you'll know what human rights activists are often about.

In my country "human rights activists" were the people who somehow had money to smoke Marlboro and drink whiskey when the rest of us were standing in kilometers long lines for flour, milk and a drop of gasoline.

[Orogun01]

Its a good observation that the Chinese are communist only in name. Kissinger noticed this a long time ago during his visits to China (when he was busy making anti soviet deals with Chinese leadership). You're wrong in thinking that communism is the threat here. China hasn't for a long time used any of the tactics that led the former SSSR to the grave (such as inspiring and financing revolutions worldwide).

In fact it has abandoned communist internationalism, in favor of economical dominance.

That is the real threat from the US/EU perspective, the fact that time is working in favor of the Chinese in every respect (in regards to the economy). The US is so dependent on China, that it cannot but feel threatened.

 

Yes, she was arrested for political dissent. On the other hand, if you've been in a formerly communist country that went through one of the various soft revolutions, you'll know what human rights activists are often about.

In my country "human rights activists" were the people who somehow had money to smoke Marlboro and drink whiskey when the rest of us were standing in kilometers long lines for flour, milk and a drop of gasoline.

 

The threat is entirely perceive only by our part, no doubt. There are still remnants of Cold War thinking and the "Great America", we act as the police of the world, as the world's foremost superpower and we consider ourselves so. China is threatening that view and we wish to bring them under our power, specially because of the economic reasons you mentioned. The recent spike in anti-Chinese communist regime propaganda is merely the result of of the attention that has been put on China and the east in general. We would feel more comfortable if China was another Japan, meek and accommodating.

 

You are right, it was similar in my case; the middle class is usually the one that promotes these desires. But bringing in Maslow's pyramid of needs here; it's because the rest is so occupied with thoughts of survival to concern themselves with a revolution. So it's up to those people to push the issue precisely because of their social standing and education, that's usually how revolutions are: some cultured individual starts an idea, pushing for change and if the economical situation is perilous the rest will rally behind it.

 

The problem is that these ideas shouldn't be met with such extreme force by the government and it only lends credibility to the need for change. It's this isolationist behavior that the free market can't tolerate.

 

P.S. If I may be so indiscreet; may I ask which was your country's regime?

[Blarghagh]

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

 

Okay, I agree with the point made by this thread, but can you please not spout out cliches like they mean something?

[Hiro Protagonist]

In short, we believe you are oppressing your people and that's not right.

 

And Western countries don't oppress their people? Can you show me a Western Country where the people are free and not oppressed by degrees of tyranny.

[RPGmasterBoo]

The threat is entirely perceive only by our part, no doubt. There are still remnants of Cold War thinking and the "Great America", we act as the police of the world, as the world's foremost superpower and we consider ourselves so. China is threatening that view and we wish to bring them under our power, specially because of the economic reasons you mentioned. The recent spike in anti-Chinese communist regime propaganda is merely the result of of the attention that has been put on China and the east in general. We would feel more comfortable if China was another Japan, meek and accommodating.

 

You are right, it was similar in my case; the middle class is usually the one that promotes these desires. But bringing in Maslow's pyramid of needs here; it's because the rest is so occupied with thoughts of survival to concern themselves with a revolution. So it's up to those people to push the issue precisely because of their social standing and education, that's usually how revolutions are: some cultured individual starts an idea, pushing for change and if the economical situation is perilous the rest will rally behind it.

 

The problem is that these ideas shouldn't be met with such extreme force by the government and it only lends credibility to the need for change. It's this isolationist behavior that the free market can't tolerate.

 

P.S. If I may be so indiscreet; may I ask which was your country's regime?

 

Your honesty is refreshing.

 

It wasn't that they were the middle class, most of them were dregs of our political system. It was the funds liberally sent from the west, that gave them a position of power and influence. Around these parts "human rights activists" is synonymous with ideological workers on US/EU payroll. In friendly countries their task is to increase their patrons influence. In unfriendly ones, its really pure subversion.

 

I live in Serbia now, formerly Yugoslavia. You may wonder where this confident attitude comes from. Its because Serbia is a very small country where "everyone knows everyone else", and very few things can stay hidden or obscured for long.

 

Change for whom? Change for you perhaps, it is doubtful if China would now, or ever - have any benefit of becoming democratic. I doubt very much that the major public opinion in China is one of a need for radical change.

After all, China is living proof of an incredibly successful market economy under an "authoritarian" government - something that was considered impossible a few decades ago.

There is no imperative for change at the moment.

 

Besides, even if they do change, they wont become a semi-colony like Japan unless by military defeat or a sudden collapse of the entire political system. The Chinese leadership doesn't appear so silly. They introduce changes at a snail's pace, carefully, without experimentation.

Which is why I think the US and EU are at best on a standstill with China - at worst a slowly losing side. China's current policy isn't likely to change without a major conflict.

[Orogun01]

Your honesty is refreshing.

 

It wasn't that they were the middle class, most of them were dregs of our political system. It was the funds liberally sent from the west, that gave them a position of power and influence. Around these parts "human rights activists" is synonymous with ideological workers on US/EU payroll. In friendly countries their task is to increase their patrons influence. In unfriendly ones, its really pure subversion.

 

I live in Serbia now, formerly Yugoslavia. You may wonder where this confident attitude comes from. Its because Serbia is a very small country where "everyone knows everyone else", and very few things can stay hidden or obscured for long.

 

Change for whom? Change for you perhaps, it is doubtful if China would now, or ever - have any benefit of becoming democratic. I doubt very much that the major public opinion in China is one of a need for radical change.

After all, China is living proof of an incredibly successful market economy under an "authoritarian" government - something that was considered impossible a few decades ago.

There is no imperative for change at the moment.

 

Besides, even if they do change, they wont become a semi-colony like Japan unless by military defeat or a sudden collapse of the entire political system. The Chinese leadership doesn't appear so silly. They introduce changes at a snail's pace, carefully, without experimentation.

Which is why I think the US and EU are at best on a standstill with China - at worst a slowly losing side. China's current policy isn't likely to change without a major conflict.

That's the problem with small countries, everybody knows everybody or at least that's what they think and mistakes haunt you forever. Which makes them worse as a totalitarian state since the individual lives with the concern of expressing the wrong thought.

 

Whilst I don't think that a democracy is necessarily what is best for China but it's these kinds of events that need to change. They can't be a superpower and close themselves to the world or close their people to the world. If the majority is truly with them then they shouldn't be afraid of a few dissidents, acknowledging them only perpetuates the notion that they are oppressive.

I truly think that China can change without conflict, they have been steadily opening up to the West and have even changed their views from what it was the Old "Ultra-Communist" China to a more enterprising country. More influence from the West on Chinese affairs will slowly but surely make a dent on their policies. If not we only need to realize that we share a symbiosis with them, if we tilt the scales on our side in a way that makes them redundant we gain the upper hand and we can impose our views on them. Economics is the new battlefield.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Nice realpolitik.

 

Only I see they are leading this economy war. Of course they do keep their state reserves in dollars, so symbiosis and integration with the US was their intention from the start. Makes the idea of conflict troublesome to say the least.

[Orogun01]

Nice realpolitik.

 

Only I see they are leading this economy war. Of course they do keep their state reserves in dollars, so symbiosis and integration with the US was their intention from the start. Makes the idea of conflict troublesome to say the least.

They control production, if the western allies decided to close trade with China and seek alternative suppliers it would leave them in a position closer to their 1920's. Overpopulation becomes unsustainable, poverty, lack of jobs and they'll probably begin the mass emigrations again. So China has much to lose without allies; all that we need is viable threat, that is to say that we show them that we can survive without them. Change the balance of power for our benefit.