3 ms·

I guess these are just the effects of Google's decision. As for 'if it's different, kill it': I've noticed this in my discussions about China. Many of the peop

I guess these are just the effects of Google's decision. As for 'if it's different, kill it': I've noticed this in my discussions about China. Many of the people I talked to that supported China's handling of things (or were themselves Chinese) disagreed with me on a fundamental value basis which you can't argue. I value human rights far, far above nationalism, yet those people did not. I simply do not see how they could do that, and, I'm guessing, they can't see how I could consider human rights more important than national pride. The Internet is mostly ruled the by United States and Europe - if the word 'ruled' is even applicable. Anyway, the US and Europe tend to share the idea of human rights > nationalism, and are thus pushing it in other places too. Now, my opinion. I don't think you can go with the 'he just has a different view than you, everyone's view is good' thing here. I think there is a 'good view' and a 'bad view' - where the "goodness" of a view is characterized by long term societal benefit and societal contentment. Obviously, I think the 'good-er' view is one which emphasizes human rights over nationalism, because while allowing human rights might cause some unpleasant effects in the short term, in the long term, it will result in a better country with a happier populace. Why are there riots? Why is there a need to suppress information? Because people are unhappy. Clearly, the current system of suppression isn't working perfectly. In fact, it isn't working perfectly by definition, since if everyone were happy, this wouldn't be needed. (By my definition, of course.) Now, I realize that my point of view may sound biased - incredibly so. Maybe even something along the lines of "I'm right because the things I say are better". But you say: "Just because it's different doesn't mean you must kill it." You don't have to, but perhaps it will be better for the world as a whole if you do? I'd love to hear your counterargument if you're willing to write another sentence about china. (Ack, that sounded snarky. Wasn't meant to.)

jhancock 17y ago
"Clearly, the current system of suppression isn't working perfectly." No argument there. How would you do it differently? I have to ignore the history comparisons by you and more so the parent as they cover far too large time periods and I'm only familiar with China of the last 10 years. China's leadership, for the most part, makes decisions based on controlling their own domain. I believe a balanced solution requires wealthy countries that trade with China to take a uniform stance to protect workers, environment, and property everywhere they do business. Citizens of these countries and their leaders have to push for this as China clearly is going to simply protect their side of the equation. Which country or group of countries are going to step forward in a unified front to create balance? What conditions will force their hand? Perhaps we are seeing those conditions unfold right now. Time will tell.
grandalf 17y ago
I don't disagree with your views, as such. I feel comfortable judging countries on the merits of their policies and track records, etc. However, the real question is, what do you think we should do about it? Consider our range of options: - learning Mandarin and translating controversial English language documents, then distributing them into China. - Traveling to China carrying a hard drive full of uncensored wikipedia pages. - boycotting Chinese products - finding an activist (terrorist according to the Chinese government) charity and donating a few dollars. - Lobbying your local officials to support trade/economic sanctions on China (sanctions create intentional non-death suffering intended to inspire political uprisings). - Lobbying your local officials to advocate for a zero tolerance policy on human rights violations from US trading partners, etc. All of these specify a clear course of action and have a fairly expectable outcome. But suppose your goal is one of the following: - To have the US send war ships into the oceans near China. - To have the US impose sanctions on other nations that trade with China (sanctions create intentional non-death suffering intended to inspire political uprisings). - To have the US demand the release of all Chinese political prisoners with a threat of selling arms to China's enemies if it fails to comply. As you can see, we start from basic moral outrage and find ourselves very quickly sounding like raging neoconservatives. My view is that we should REMOVE all trade barriers with China and increase immigration from China by 10000% over 5 years. I elaborated in the previous thread about the causes of China's behavior (and the existence of much similar behavior on the part of a slightly younger USA)... Also, if you're concerned about censorship, consider the JFK assassination and how a major event (seemingly a very significant conspiracy of some kind to overthrow the US government) has been kept top secret, etc. Is it really that much of a stretch that China wishes to suppress knowledge of its own governmental overthrow attempt? If, at the time of the JFK assassination, there had been dozens of Chinese journalists covering the event and getting camera footage, firsthand accounts, etc., then perhaps the US would have tried some fairly disreputable ways of censoring the info after the fact. I am no expert on this, but it seems to me that if it was just one crazy guy with a gun, then all of the information should have been declassified long ago. Americans tend to put things like protests on a pedestal... but what about KKK protests in the US? Many Americans pat themselves on the back and support the banning of the expression of such views. I find the views of the KKK appalling, but we either have free speech or we don't... we either have full transparency or we have censorship. China is no different.

jhancock 17y ago

"Clearly, the current system of suppression isn't working perfectly." No argument there. How would you do it differently? I have to ignore the history comparisons by you and more so the parent as they cover far too large time periods and I'm only familiar with China of the last 10 years. China's leadership, for the most part, makes decisions based on controlling their own domain. I believe a balanced solution requires wealthy countries that trade with China to take a uniform stance to protect workers, environment, and property everywhere they do business. Citizens of these countries and their leaders have to push for this as China clearly is going to simply protect their side of the equation. Which country or group of countries are going to step forward in a unified front to create balance? What conditions will force their hand? Perhaps we are seeing those conditions unfold right now. Time will tell.

grandalf 17y ago

I don't disagree with your views, as such. I feel comfortable judging countries on the merits of their policies and track records, etc. However, the real question is, what do you think we should do about it? Consider our range of options: - learning Mandarin and translating controversial English language documents, then distributing them into China. - Traveling to China carrying a hard drive full of uncensored wikipedia pages. - boycotting Chinese products - finding an activist (terrorist according to the Chinese government) charity and donating a few dollars. - Lobbying your local officials to support trade/economic sanctions on China (sanctions create intentional non-death suffering intended to inspire political uprisings). - Lobbying your local officials to advocate for a zero tolerance policy on human rights violations from US trading partners, etc. All of these specify a clear course of action and have a fairly expectable outcome. But suppose your goal is one of the following: - To have the US send war ships into the oceans near China. - To have the US impose sanctions on other nations that trade with China (sanctions create intentional non-death suffering intended to inspire political uprisings). - To have the US demand the release of all Chinese political prisoners with a threat of selling arms to China's enemies if it fails to comply. As you can see, we start from basic moral outrage and find ourselves very quickly sounding like raging neoconservatives. My view is that we should REMOVE all trade barriers with China and increase immigration from China by 10000% over 5 years. I elaborated in the previous thread about the causes of China's behavior (and the existence of much similar behavior on the part of a slightly younger USA)... Also, if you're concerned about censorship, consider the JFK assassination and how a major event (seemingly a very significant conspiracy of some kind to overthrow the US government) has been kept top secret, etc. Is it really that much of a stretch that China wishes to suppress knowledge of its own governmental overthrow attempt? If, at the time of the JFK assassination, there had been dozens of Chinese journalists covering the event and getting camera footage, firsthand accounts, etc., then perhaps the US would have tried some fairly disreputable ways of censoring the info after the fact. I am no expert on this, but it seems to me that if it was just one crazy guy with a gun, then all of the information should have been declassified long ago. Americans tend to put things like protests on a pedestal... but what about KKK protests in the US? Many Americans pat themselves on the back and support the banning of the expression of such views. I find the views of the KKK appalling, but we either have free speech or we don't... we either have full transparency or we have censorship. China is no different.