3 ms·

With his current profile if he wished to renounce his support and seek asylum, he could. It would be a stinging betrayal for the party, more effective than any

With his current profile if he wished to renounce his support and seek asylum, he could. It would be a stinging betrayal for the party, more effective than any protest that was ever waged for HK... And it wouldn't endanger him or his fortune.

actuator 6y ago
He might be happy and content there. Also, leaving your homeland is a tough decision and he would lose his home audience potentially if he is vocal.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
da_big_ghey 6y ago
It is well known that the CCP holds one's family hostage in cases when one goes abroad, as collateral against one's return: https://www.businessinsider.com/liu-changming-china-holds-officials-family-hostage-to-force-return-2018-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/liu-changming-china-holds-of... https://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-deals-with-dissent-threats-family-arrests-2018-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-deals-with-dissent... It is an open secret that this is the case for many students who come to American universities, and this is often how they coerce them into sending back IP and trade secrets. I would shudder to imagine what might befall the family of a prominent defector that so humiliated the party.
- glenstein 6y ago
  I think it's true in those circumstances, but I don't believe that's part of a systematic policy. I would imagine that the possibility of Cixin Liu leaving would be contingent on whatever the idiosyncrasies are of his personal circumstances. I would say he's not necessarily constrained by the examples you've cited, though they raise a valid concern.
  - v-yadli 6y ago
    The GP is basically saying, it is well known that every police is a piano (police is an instrument for keeping order, piano is an instrument). This kind of logic misusage is strangely common in affairs towards China but I'm not too surprised. I still recommend just sit down, exchange information, and think.
    - glenstein 6y ago
      I'll be blunt. I understood your first line but I am completely lost with your second and third sentences. What kind of logic misusage? Mine? GPs? Who is supposed to sit down and exchange information? Me? GP? Cixin Liu? Exchange information with whom and to what end? And are police being an "instrument" supposed to indicate that holding domestic relatives hostage is indeed a systematic policy rather than a circumstantial tactic particular to special cases, and is failing to understand that is a misuse of logic?
      - v-yadli 6y ago
        I thought "every police is a piano" is clearly wrong, and based on that thought, I further refer to it as the misuse of deductive reasoning -- confusing subsets with supersets. Take an example -- if we could agree on that -- it is well known that police will kill bad people when the bad people are doing really bad things -- with the precondition that the bad people must be alive to do really bad things, and to be killed. With the same faulty deduction rules, one could say that it is well known that police kill people whenever people are alive. Sorry if that caused confusion. > sit down and exchange information For one. I am a Chinese citizen. I know many people, including close friends, relatives, studying abroad. I am not aware of any cases that their relatives are held hostage by the government. I am aware that police go after bad people (of course, the definition of "bad people" may vary nation-wise, but please take a little break on that and assume it normal), even if the bad people are relative to one entity studying abroad. For two, about Cixin Liu's case. This is the part I genuinely don't understand -- why would he seek asylum outside China? Did he do anything illegal? This whole thread is about an English version of the postscript in his work. I have read both native and translated version, and can confirm that the same postscript is attached in both versions, and the translation is quite precise. And then people start to discuss about "seeking for help abroad", "HK protest" etc. -- do these people think the postscript is so offensive that the government will go after him? I don't think the text is offensive by any means. I don't think the government will go after him. If that's not the case, what are they talking about? Am I missing something?

actuator 6y ago

He might be happy and content there. Also, leaving your homeland is a tough decision and he would lose his home audience potentially if he is vocal.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

da_big_ghey 6y ago

It is well known that the CCP holds one's family hostage in cases when one goes abroad, as collateral against one's return: https://www.businessinsider.com/liu-changming-china-holds-officials-family-hostage-to-force-return-2018-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/liu-changming-china-holds-of... https://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-deals-with-dissent-threats-family-arrests-2018-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/how-china-deals-with-dissent... It is an open secret that this is the case for many students who come to American universities, and this is often how they coerce them into sending back IP and trade secrets. I would shudder to imagine what might befall the family of a prominent defector that so humiliated the party.

glenstein 6y ago
I think it's true in those circumstances, but I don't believe that's part of a systematic policy. I would imagine that the possibility of Cixin Liu leaving would be contingent on whatever the idiosyncrasies are of his personal circumstances. I would say he's not necessarily constrained by the examples you've cited, though they raise a valid concern.
- v-yadli 6y ago
  The GP is basically saying, it is well known that every police is a piano (police is an instrument for keeping order, piano is an instrument). This kind of logic misusage is strangely common in affairs towards China but I'm not too surprised. I still recommend just sit down, exchange information, and think.
  - glenstein 6y ago
    I'll be blunt. I understood your first line but I am completely lost with your second and third sentences. What kind of logic misusage? Mine? GPs? Who is supposed to sit down and exchange information? Me? GP? Cixin Liu? Exchange information with whom and to what end? And are police being an "instrument" supposed to indicate that holding domestic relatives hostage is indeed a systematic policy rather than a circumstantial tactic particular to special cases, and is failing to understand that is a misuse of logic?
    - v-yadli 6y ago
      I thought "every police is a piano" is clearly wrong, and based on that thought, I further refer to it as the misuse of deductive reasoning -- confusing subsets with supersets. Take an example -- if we could agree on that -- it is well known that police will kill bad people when the bad people are doing really bad things -- with the precondition that the bad people must be alive to do really bad things, and to be killed. With the same faulty deduction rules, one could say that it is well known that police kill people whenever people are alive. Sorry if that caused confusion. > sit down and exchange information For one. I am a Chinese citizen. I know many people, including close friends, relatives, studying abroad. I am not aware of any cases that their relatives are held hostage by the government. I am aware that police go after bad people (of course, the definition of "bad people" may vary nation-wise, but please take a little break on that and assume it normal), even if the bad people are relative to one entity studying abroad. For two, about Cixin Liu's case. This is the part I genuinely don't understand -- why would he seek asylum outside China? Did he do anything illegal? This whole thread is about an English version of the postscript in his work. I have read both native and translated version, and can confirm that the same postscript is attached in both versions, and the translation is quite precise. And then people start to discuss about "seeking for help abroad", "HK protest" etc. -- do these people think the postscript is so offensive that the government will go after him? I don't think the text is offensive by any means. I don't think the government will go after him. If that's not the case, what are they talking about? Am I missing something?