7 ms·
China Bans Online Bible Sales as It Tightens Religious Controls
- monochromatic 9y agoThat’s... just evil. Even atheists generally support people’s freedom to read and believe as they please.
- EliRivers 9y ago"Even atheists"? Are atheists pretty evil, but not quite this evil? Are atheists well-known for being anti-freedom? Why "even atheists"?
- wand3r 9y agoI think they meant that it is evil; also atheiest-- people who do not believe in any religion, would not do such a thing.
- TaylorAlexander 9y agoI think just because atheists don’t tend to care for the book. But yeah we’re typically less in to banning books than religious people so it is an odd comment.
- whatshisface 9y agoAthiests (the community) are known for being outspoken about the damage that certian religions have caused and are causing, but they're also known for supporting the free exchange of ideas including those that they think are harmful. Atheists (the definition) aren't known for anything because atheism doesn't demand any specific behaviors.
- tjoff 9y agoI haven't seen that and is starting to believe that might be something typical for the US.
- lurquer 9y agoI wonder if there have been any explicitly Athiest regimes? That is, governments based on an ideology that explicitly denies the existence of God and devalues all religions? If only we had historical examples of such regimes, perhaps we could see if they were benign or murderous. Oh what a pity we don't have such examples.
- harimau777 9y agoMy understanding is that most Communistic regimes were explicitly Atheist. I'm not a historian so I may not have my facts completely correct, but my understanding is that: The Soviet Union more or less outlawed religion. China is officially Atheistic but tolerates certain recognized religions. My understanding is that they outlaw/suppress certain things they view as "superstition" (such as supernatural and moral aspects of Qigong) in a way that would be considered questionable in the west. On a more positive side, I wonder if there are any of the Scandinavian countries that could be considered to more or less implement Humanism. I say that because it seems like Humanism fills a lot of the same roles for Atheists (moral system, providing hope, providing meaning etc.) that religion does for theists.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> I wonder if there have been any explicitly Athiest regimes? Some, but not all, regimes in the Leninist (and Stalinist, etc., derivatives) tradition were/are, and early the French Revolutionary regime briefly was during the period of the establishment of the Cult of Reason (which, while called a “cult” with good was, was atheistic and thus not a religion in the theistic sense), but that was soon replaced by the Cult of the Supreme Being (which was deistic, but not atheistic) during the Terror.
- lurquer 9y agoI seriously doubt you're correct. The communist regimes (as well as their demented cousins such as DPRK, Pol Pot, Viet Kong, etc.) murdered millions upon millions of their own people in the 20th century. These regimes could not have been atheistic as such horrendous genoicidal bloodshed is typically the result of Christisnity. I know this to be true, as I've read it many times here. Stalin and Pol Pot and Mao and Kim were undoubtedly Christians. Atheists are generally rational and not given over to such genocidal tendancies. You need to check your facts.
- harimau777 9y agoAtheists have a reputation for being anti-religion. This certainly isn't inherent to Atheism or reflective of all Atheists. However, I have met many Atheists who were highly intolerant or disrespectful of religion.
- icebraining 9y agoI'm disrespectful of many things, that doesn't mean I want to ban them. Even if they're as dangerous as Christianity.
- acqq 9y ago...or as one another which can’t be named, as it would be “racist.”
- harimau777 9y agoI agree that we shouldn't ban something just because we dislike/disrespect it; instead I meant that, unfortunately, many people (on both sides) don't see things that way. Sorry if that's not what it sounded like I was saying in my original post.
- icebraining 9y agoI understood what you're saying; what I'm saying is that we should be careful not to assume someone want to ban something just because they're being disrespectful to it.
- acqq 9y agoThe religious people of all monotheisic religions don’t believe in almost all the same gods as the atheists. The atheists just don’t believe in one more.
- jsonne 9y agoI'm really not trying to start a tit for tat who is worse argument as all religions, including mine (Christian/Catholic) has their fair share of atrocities, but certainly many people were murdered and otherwise oppressed under state atheist regimes in Communist countries. It's worth calling out and remembering.
- reitanqild 9y agoI'll take it a bit further: I'm no Catholic and have never been. But honestly: while Catholics has done much wrong they don't come anywere near Pol Pot, Stalin, the Reign of Terror etc
- reitanqild 9y agoTo late to update my post but I should add that I don't blame you or any other current Catholic for what happened during the dark ages. And by the way, since that's not clear from my first post: I'm a Christian as well, just not Catholic.
- dang 9y agoNo religious flamewars on HN, please. Upthread was teetering, but here it plummets.
- EliRivers 9y agoSure thing, Dang. FWIW, I'd have said the exact same if it had been "even botanists" or "even car mechanics". It just seemed massively orthogonal.
- lawlessone 9y agoAs an atheist i can't even see why they would ban it. It's a mish mash of traditional views, fallacies , contradictions and stories. Studying it should teach you see all these things.
- offhand2464 9y agoTo make a bad comparison, not everyone can develop antibodies upon mild exposure to a virus.
- j0e1 9y agoA bad comparison indeed.
- assblaster 9y agoThe stories include a historical person named Jesus who started a new religion after he died and was seen by his followers being alive after he was dead. These followers went on to become martyrs voluntarily. I think it's pretty obvious why the Chinese government is so afraid of the Bible, since historically, people's lives have been changed dramatically based on what is inside the Bible. The Bible can only lead to instability.
- madengr 9y agoDitto. By banning something, they just encourage people to seek it. Better to just expose the kookiness of all religions.
- icebraining 9y agoWhy "even atheists"? Historically, atheists are not even close to the biggest aggressors against Christians. That would be other Christians, probably followed by Muslims (during the ascendancy of the Caliphates).
- dwheeler 9y agoChristians have been persecuted by polytheists, atheists, Muslims, and many others. Ancient Rome sent many Christians to the lions. The USSR had official state atheism, for example, and persecuted Christians. Certainly Christians have persecuted other Christians, but I think there's little evidence that Christians have been the dominant ones. Much more info is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians On the other hand, clearly many atheists allow others to have different beliefs, including Christian beliefs, and to allow religious texts to be distributed (such as the Bible). This seems to be much more about power and control over the Chinese people.
- icebraining 9y agoThat page simply ignores the Christian-on-Christian violence. Where's the Thirty Years' War, "one of the longest and most destructive conflicts in human history"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dwheeler 9y agoQuote from that page about the Thirty Years War: "Initially a war between various Protestant and Catholic states in the fragmented Holy Roman Empire, it gradually developed into a more general conflict involving most of the great powers. These states employed relatively large mercenary armies, and the war became less about religion and more of a continuation of the France–Habsburg rivalry for European political pre-eminence." In particular, you have Catholic France against the Catholic Habsburgs, and the issues were not doctrinal. Not what you would expect if this was a war about religion. This was not a war about religion primarily, by the time most of the deaths occurred.
- hangonhn 9y agoThis has nothing to do with religion or what people believe. This is about control. Religion is another source of authority, which the Chinese government will never tolerate. This is also why there is a campaign to promote the more traditional Confucian values: obedience to your elders and emperor (now replace emperor with government) and be a useful member of a hierarchy.
- richardknop 9y agoDo they? Many notable atheists are known for their disdain of Abrahamic religions and how they poison minds of uneducated majority of the world.
- r00fus 9y agoEven strident atheists (Bill Maher) are not exactly picky about mocking whatever form of "invisible friend" you delude yourself with. It's just easy to mock an overgrown persecution complex and blatant hypocrisy on high-profile Christian/evangelists.
- richardknop 9y agoBill Maher is a TV personality. I’d not consider a representative of atheism. Richard Dawkins or Christoper Hitchens would be better candidates. Bill Maher is mostly a comedian. Thanks for the downvotes btw, as a Christian critical of evangelists and similar conmen I don’t really care. You should read some writings of Einstein and other great scientists btw, hardcore atheism is very radical niche and even most evolutionary biologists and theoretical physicists don’t believe it.
- andy_ppp 9y agoWhat are the Chinese government so scared of! They have complete control in a way not possible in the West, I can’t really foresee how the state would be overthrown by the people there?
- wccrawford 9y agoThey got that way, and keep it that way, by doing things like this.
- s1312312 9y agoChristian churches played a major role in the end of communism in East Germany.
- jacquesm 9y agoThey are afraid of other power blocks and that's what churches really are when you strip away the veneer. You can still see this all over Europe, Romania, Greece, Bulgaria, Poland, Germany, Ireland, England, Spain and Italy have very powerful religious entities, and in many other countries even though the religious fractions are not quite that powerful they still have lot of power to influence politics and life in general.
- andy_ppp 9y agoThe church has literally zero power to do anything in the UK. We live in secular societies and I cannot believe your statement is provably true. No church/religion will ever go up against the power of the Chinese state, unless God herself returns to Earth...
- icebraining 9y agoI think your perception of "power" is too narrow. Influence into the behaviors and opinions of people is power. The money they bring in and distribute is power. And the fact that the Queen of Britain is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England gives the Church importance - and therefore power - over many other influences.
- cjmcqueen 9y agoThis is bad. I get that religion has taboos, but religion also has an influence on morals. Yes, there are ways to be a good moral person without the Bible, but are we really giving people agency and the ability to choose if they are sensored? Human rights are human rights and as a human I should have the right to obtain a Bible if I so chose and live the consequences there of.
- spankalee 9y agoIt's bad because of censorship, not because of any supposed good influence on morals by religion.
- hexo 9y agothere's already a ton of censorship deployed worldwide, one of those is ban on literature spreading hate, killing and humiliation of others, and frankly - most parts of bible aren't very different in this. bible "morals" are extremely outdated
- gcb0 9y agoI think you mean "there are ways to be a good moral person even with the Bible," ? remember that every religion teaches intolerance to other beliefs. if not directly by simply suggesting it is the only truth.
- DeusExMachina 9y agoApart from the fact that your statement is simply not true, every value "discriminates" towards opposite values. In every hierarchy, when you define something as better, you automatically define something else as worse. That's how you make any decision in your life. The alternative is inaction. It has nothing to do with religion. It's an axiom of every value system.
- just_lurkin 9y agoatheism is unique in this regard because their intolerance stems from a higher Scientific Truth, so it is ok /s
- citilife 9y agoThe Heathens! It's been spiraling down for a while now. I know quite a few Chinese who moved from China to the U.S. now, while they can. A couple of them are LGBT, where it was made clear they weren't welcome - even with PhD's in Chemical Engineering and Physics.
- TaylorAlexander 9y agoAnd yes the US doesn’t always treat foreigners as welcome either. :-/
- citilife 9y agoNo doubt... It's just strange China is literally chasing away some serious talent because they don't agree with their moral code.
- galieos_ghost 9y agoThe government wants to maintain power at all costs, what's best for the country and it's citizens is irrelevant. If a large number of Chinese begin to value the word of god more than glorious leader Xi, that's a threat to the status quo.
- myth_drannon 9y agoThey have plenty of people, last I heard. Plus or minus one million people here or there doesn't really make any dent on their society and getting rid of "undesirables" without mass murder looks very beneficial in the eyes of the authorities.
- galieos_ghost 9y agoFor an authoritarian government to work long term they have to be the highest power. This is why the Soviets worked so hard to destroy the church as well as the concept of family, people who value god or family above the government are a threat. In effect the government has to become god.
- andy_ppp 9y agoIs this true? I always found it strange that the Kremlin literally has five churches inside of it... I mean Communism and Christianity have a surprising amount of commonality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism
- galieos_ghost 9y agoKremlin was first built in 1485, most churches were built well before the soviet era. As for persecution of clergy is true, I suppose it depends if you count mass murder, torture, and shutting down churches as persecution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-religious_campaign_during_the_Russian_Civil_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-religious_campaign_during...
- dragonwriter 9y ago> For an authoritarian government to work long term they have to be the highest power. This is why the Soviets worked so hard to destroy the church as well as the concept of family, people who value god or family above the government are a threat. The Soviets did that largely because that's part of Marxist doctrine that Lenin didn't explicitly abandon, not because it is objectively useful for authoritarian regimes’ longevity (as evidenced by the fact that authoritarian regimes where the state was unified or allied with religious authority and promoted the value of family have done quite well, and were long the norm.)
- rubidium 9y agoExactly, and we see similar currents in the United States over the past 50 years as well. Crisis and Leviathan by Robert Higgs is an essential read on this.
- sunstone 9y agoAny Chinese interested in reading a Bible will just download it. Restricting access to the printed version will have very little impact and will likely increase demand, because banning books usually does that.
- DeusExMachina 9y agoI would not underestimate the ability of the Chinese government to control what people can access online.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- factsaresacred 9y agoI don't think The Streisand effect applies here. It's not that people don't know what the Bible is...anyone who is looking to buy one clearly does. It's that those who are Christian can't freely practice their religion. Then there's the whole downloading an illegal book getting you into trouble angle, too.
- dharmach 9y agoReligious conversion is not about making a religion available to those who are interested. Money, muscle, propaganda, deceit -all are used to recruit new members.
- 738472527784 9y agoTrying to download the Bible? 10 points from Gryffindor! You just lost access to public transportation.
- Quarrelsome 9y agoIts worth noting the absolutely insane impact that cargo cult Christianity had on China which arguably caused the Chinese civil war. That might be some context as to why Christianity has been singled out? EDIT: why would you downvote this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Heavenly_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Heavenly_Kingdom From the source: > A self-proclaimed convert to Christianity, Hong Xiuquan ... [claimed] ... that he was the second son of God and the younger brother of Jesus.
- rukittenme 9y agoYou're being down-voted because your comment can be construed as justification. Which, if it is, is absolutely deplorable.
- bshepard 9y agoI don't think it's a justification, it's a contextualization.
- dajohnson89 9y agoyep, and you presented it in a factual non biased way. it's just not convenient for the HN narrative that censorship=BAD.
- Quarrelsome 9y agothese people should read the link. Its a fascinating piece of history. If one had that native history one could understand a little more why they might persecute Christianity a bit more strongly than other religions. None of that in any, shape or form ever seeks to justify it. Just understand it.
- 794CD01 9y agoIf you disagree with the justification, it would be better to explain that position. Otherwise it appears that you are starting from the premise that this is bad so any justification presented must necessarily be dismissed regardless of validity.
- GuiA 9y agoA friend of mine has a theory that as China grows in power, it will eventually push its own alternative calendar as an ideological statement, as the calendar we currently use is based on the birth of Jesus Christ, something the Chinese government does not particularly care about.
- OscarCunningham 9y agoIt would be logistically easier to keep the same calendar and ban the idea that it's based on Jesus Christ.
- nradov 9y agoHistorians everywhere have kind of already done that by replacing the Dionysian era system with the Current Era notation system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era
- 794CD01 9y agoHave you and your friend never heard of Chinese new year? China already has its own very popular calendar that predates the Gregorian.
- GuiA 9y agoUnless you can point me to otherwise, I believe it is still the year 2018 of our lord and savior Jesus Christ as far as China is concerned in all of its international business and political dealings.
- rgbrenner 9y agoThe Nationalist Party of China in the 1920s adopted the Gregorian calendar. This is the group that the communists overthrew and they retreated to Taiwan in 1949/50. The communists never changed back... so the Chinese calendar is only used for traditional chinese events (like the chinese new year). This is part of the period in china known as the Century of Humiliation (1839-1949)... which includes the invasions of western powers, opium wars, etc.
- surfmike 9y agoReligion proved to be a strong counter to communism in Eastern Europe. It's no wonder they're scared.
- hexo 9y agoand strong supporters of nazis... (speaking about catholics)
- lainga 9y agoCertain cardinals in the Vatican supported the Nazis. I don't see how the Kirchenkampf, Mit brennender sorge and the actions of Catholics in the camps were outweighed by those cardinals' actions, any more than the Belgians were Nazis because of Leon Degrelle.
- surfmike 9y agoNot strong supporters by any means, and many resistors. Wikipedia has a good page explaining the history. The most you can say is that some Catholics leaders were too compliant and did not protest enough, but countless other Catholics worked actively to save Jews from the holocaust and to counter Naziism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_Nazi_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_Nazi_Germa...
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agoIs censorship even effective? I'd love to see an academic treatment of the reality of censorship minus the obvious moral qualms. I suppose it's probably an impossible thing to measure.
- bytematic 9y agoI don't think that would be impossible to measure. Would you be more interested in a controlled experiment or more of a study on real world censorship?
- jacquesm 9y agoCensorship in China is the complementing arm of propaganda and yes it is effective. Control information and you control the people. https://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/09/what-makes-censorship-in-china-so-effective/279467/ https://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/09/what-makes...
- paradite 9y agoSome interesting research on this topic: http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/censored.pdf?m=1447795312 http://gking.harvard.edu/files/gking/files/censored.pdf?m=14... https://citizenlab.ca/2016/11/wechat-china-censorship-one-app-two-systems/ https://citizenlab.ca/2016/11/wechat-china-censorship-one-ap... Some interesting answers on Quora: https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-that-a-lot-of-Chinese-people-dont-feel-oppressed-by-their-regime-but-some-foreigners-insist-they-are https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-that-a-lot-of-Chinese-people...
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agoThat Harvard article is really interesting, thanks.
- hexo 9y agofinally, rest should follow this
- ghostbrainalpha 9y agoIt's important to note, that while it is now illegal to buy the Bible online in China.... They are still allowed to purchase the Bible from official church bookstores. This is probably more about finding out exactly how many Bibles are being sold in the country rather than completely stopping them from being sold.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> They are still allowed to purchase the Bible from official church bookstores. Official churches in China (even those notionally identified with other global denominations) are significantly state controlled, monitored, and censored. > This is probably more about finding out exactly how many Bibles are being sold And to whom.
- enigma31401 9y agoJesus's anarchosyndicalism must be dangerous.
- krapp 9y ago> Jesus's anarchosyndicalism must be dangerous. And he said unto them, "Whose is this image and superscription?" They said unto him, "Caesar's." Then said he unto them, Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's. Please forgive the invocation of a meme on Hacker News but ...u wot m8?
- rrggrr 9y agoAnother sign (among many) that China is preparing for significant social unrest and probably global instability. I suspect the CCP has concluded that a rebalancing of its economy is inevitable, close at hand, and will be painful for most Chinese. The scale of China's challenge, maintaining order in a nation of its size, guarantees there will be overreach. I thought we might see mesh-networking emerge in Iran as a means for protestors to organize and communicate. Didn't happen. Now I think there's a pretty good chance China's restrictive communications networks are going to result in some real innovation in ad-hoc networking and covert communication as the months and years progress. The next Twitter may be found among USB keys embedded in brick walls, or rogue routers covertly attached to outlets in public bathrooms. Ironically, the outcome would be better for all concerned if China allowed the debate and unrest to play itself out and impact policy. History proves bottoms-up accountability delivers much better outcomes than top-down oversight.
- lainga 9y agoFor the nation, yes, but not for Nicolae Ceausescu or Xi Jinping.
- hangonhn 9y ago"History proves bottoms-up accountability delivers much better outcomes than top-down oversight." Oh I'm not so sure about that. At least for results people can see within a short amount of time, a strong, competent authoritarian government can deliver results much faster and people like that. Democracies are messy and difficult. I'm not saying this because I am pro-authoritarianism but rather as an admonishment against the notion that democracy will somehow win as if it is a law of nature and things will just flow that way ("end of history" stuff and all that). Democracy requires work and faith that it is better in the long run. Authoritarianism arises when people lose faith and patience and the demagogue promises quick results through the application of unbridled power. If we want democracy, we have to be vigilant and participate and have a good dose of patience. It requires more from the individuals than authoritarianism.
- candiodari 9y agoI get the impression this is much more likely to happen when one group of elites gets the country into an economic situation that will make them lose their power. In a way, they fucked up, but of course they don't see things that way. (I have never read in the history books about an elite that saw their actions justified by economic results. No their actions are "from God", "noble", "good for the planet", "socially just", "for the plebs", ... and so on. None of them accept the judgement that comes from the real world in terms of economic performance, in fact usually right before they lose power they attempt to falsify economic indicators on a very large scale, because at least some of them do realize that their justifications are bullshit and the result in the real world is all that matters. Those results are usually less than perfect) Then the old elites and the powerless masses have something in common : they need the government to repress things with a heavy hand. The elites need the government to repress people, because otherwise their power is under threat, or even their persons. The powerless masses want the government to be heavy-handed because they want all the shenanigans and "gentlemen's agreements" that exist with the elites blown up, and they want their newly elected people to have the power to blow those up. You see a sort of mini version happening currently. Both the middle Americans that elected him and the Bay Area progressives that hate him want Trump to have more power. Obviously things like legislating solutions to "fake news" are very, very bad for both of them, yet they both want it. I even understand how the reasoning works, and where they're both very very wrong. The progressives want heavy handed government because "they're right" (they mostly are, of course, but) and the population just doesn't see that. So we must legislate and put rules for what the population sees, hears, and so on. Otherwise climate change action, future democratic/progressive politics, open borders, ... and so on are all in great danger. ... except of course with Donald Trump in charge of enforcement actions for this ... things are not going to go well for these causes regardless of the heavy hand. And the rights and powers that the executive power acquires as a result of this legislation ... will be aimed straight at them. The middle Americans are tired of being marginalized and not listened to. They want their jobs (their industries) protected and left alone. They want limits on imports. Imports of people that complete on the job market, and imports of goods that put their employers out of business. ... except of course automation means this is useless. Furthermore, economically speaking these limits will lead to inflation, and they'll be the last ones to get wage increases. So if this indeed happens (as it appears it will) it will make their situation that much worse, not better. And of course that heavy hand will lead to more government bureaucrats interference in their lives and companies, not less.
- InTheArena 9y agoThis is not new - China has been destroying churches, bulldozing them whenever they believed they could. Any identity or belief system other then that which the state provides is a threat to totalitarian states. You see this clearly over the last two hundred years with the criminalization of Christianity not only in China and Russia, but Nazi Germany (which alternatively tried to co-opt and then destroy churches), the middle east (which has had a open war between various Muslim sects and states for the last 75 years), South East asia, etc. Hell, even the french revolution attempted to suppress religion - with the Martyrs of Compiègne and the cult of the supreme being, and the cult of reason. States which promise Utopia cannot accept any alternative to the state vision of how to reach Utopia. The difference now is that the amount of power that a modern state has far outstrips the power the Hitler and Stalin's Gestapo and NKVD. How much you want to bet that your Chinese "credit score" goes down if you read the Bible? Or 1984. Or Sanzijing.
- salimmadjd 9y agoChristianity has become a political tool now. It's a bit similar to how America feared and still does not allow members of communist party to become US citizens [1]. On the power of evangelical christianity, just look at some parts of central America, where there has been a strong conversion to evangelical Christianity. So strong that, is considered one of the reasons Hounders and Guatemala voted along with Trump administration on UN Jerusalem resolution. [2], [3] [1]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/16/communist-party-members-still-barred-us-citizenship-trump https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/16/communist-pa... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/un-jerusalem-vote-latest-updates-list-countries-voted-against-us-israel-capital-nikki-haley-general-a8124136.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/un-jerusal... [3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/guatemala-and-honduras-sided-with-trump-on-jerusalem-heres-why/2017/12/28/7c4dfeee-eb1e-11e7-956e-baea358f9725_story.html?utm_term=.00a3cba2d265 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/guatemala-...
- creep 9y agoChristianity has always been a political tool. I'm not saying that religion in general is incorrect or that it cannot exist outside of political use in a genuine way-- only that Christianity in particular has always been used in that way.
- salimmadjd 9y agoYou're absolutely correct. What I meant to say, it is now a western and particularly more so has become an American political tool.
- stuffedBelly 9y agoThere is going to be repercussion. The Chinese government starts to treat Christianity as a cult like Falun Gong, to which it used the same tactic. But unlike Falun Gong, which is more of a home-brew quasi religion from the 90s, Christianity and missionary activities have been intrinsically rooted in major cities like Nanjing and Shanghai, especially during the wartime. This also sends a danger sign to the Uyghur area, which is Muslim dominated, making Uyghurs worry that Muslim might be the next religion to crack down. If the Chinese government wants stability and total control of its people, this is not the way to do it. And unlike two decades ago, there are now hundreds of ways to uprise and much harder to crack down.
- erric 9y agoWhat kind of repercussions?
- candiodari 9y agoOne can only presume the same kinds that they faced between 1949 and 1994 or so. So essentially ... none at all. What baffles me about Chinese people is how acquiescent they are. Ironically the fact that Chinese people trust their government so much is, at least partly, the cause that their government (especially on local level) is so ridiculously untrustworthy. How untrustworthy ? It is generally accepted that about 80% of Chinese published economic indicators from public institutions are outright fabrication. If you look further into this and what it means, it is baffling. They are lies, and not just lies, but they are lies by people who do not themselves know the true numbers. About the whole financial community is convinced that the Chinese government itself has no idea about the economic performance of the country because of this pervasive and onmipresent falsification. In one famous case, a local governor from Mongolia is known to have promised to reduce steel producing capacity by about 20%. Not only did he not do it. He lied about it, and it took the central government about 4 years to realize it had happened (or at least, took 4 years before it was even mentioned anywhere). The attitude in China must change. I mean, even if the communists just want to remain in power, they must find a way to at least get decent data themselves, as well as trustworthy governors.
- woodandsteel 9y agoPart of the problem for the Chinese government is that in a little more than a century, the country has been through 4 quite different political and economic systems. There was traditional Confucianism, then the Western-inspired Nationalist regime, then Maoism,and then the more moderate era that started under Dung Jao Ping. And now Xi is creating a new, more authoritarian system. As a result the population has no real loyalty to the political system, it just keeps its head down and tries to do as well as it can. And so it will free free to revolt if it gets unhappy enough.