3 ms·

I'd suggest taking a look at the specific clauses under discussion, esp. as the draft laws are still in the public commentary stage. See clauses 2 and 3 of Arti

I'd suggest taking a look at the specific clauses under discussion, esp. as the draft laws are still in the public commentary stage. See clauses 2 and 3 of Article 34 in (https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/public-security-administron-punishments-draft/ https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/public-security-adminis...) and consider them in the context of clauses 1, 4, 5, and 6. Note the recurrent mentions of 'heroes and martyrs' and 'wars of aggression' within these clauses, something a casual reader of that BBC article would not have been led to expect, and consider that some European countries directly impacted by WW2 on their own soil have laws at least similar in letter (laws which most Americans would probably find restrictive, but I doubt anyone would regard as them as clearly 'nutty'). Of course, you can still criticize these draft laws for vagueness and unenforceability: these concerns have already been extensively covered in mainstream Chinese media outlets.

keepamovin 3y ago
Tut tut, I thought you would have learned from the HK protests that no serious current event commentator is ever really interested in what the law actually says. I.E., The Basic Law.
jcranmer 3y ago
"Causing harm to the names, images, reputations, and honor of heroes and martyrs through insult, defamation, or other such means" pretty clearly means to me something along the lines of "you can't point out that Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward caused a famine that killed tens of millions of people." There's nothing along those lines in any EU country, let alone the US (where such a concept is in extremely flagrant violation of the First Amendment). The closest you'd come is laws against Holocaust denial--but notice the key difference between a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a "good" person might have done something bad versus a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a bad deed never happened.
- aragonite 3y ago
  "heroes and martyrs" is the English translation of 英雄烈士, which is not a generic term of praise in Chinese but specifically applies to someone who died in battle (or some similar act of bravery) — think acts worthy of Victoria Cross in UK or Purple Heart in US. Even people who worship Mao do not think of him as one of the "heroes and martyrs". In China you certainly can point out, even criticize, Mao's role in the Great Leap Forward. Even "Official History" criticizes Mao! You can't be too "over the top" about it, such as comparing him to Hitler or accuse him of being a mass murderer, lest you get cancelled. But the reason you can't has nothing to do with the draft laws being proposed here. > The closest you'd come is laws against Holocaust denial--but notice the key difference between a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a "good" person might have done something bad versus a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a bad deed never happened. If you make the first kind of claim and you are wrong, you falsely accuse an innocent person. If you make the second kind of claim and you are wrong, you unjustly exonerate a guilty person. Which is worse? I don't think there's a clear answer! So I fail to see the "key difference" you are trying to highlight between these kinds of claims. Of course, if one of them is true and the other false, then there's a clearly worse claim, but then the worse claim is worse because it's false, not because of the objectionable/offensive nature of its content.
  - rawgabbit 3y ago
    The grandparent poster was referring to Peng Dehuai who dared to question the Great Leap Forward and was persecuted during the Cultural Revolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peng_Dehuai https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peng_Dehuai
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- hnfong 3y ago
  > "you can't point out that Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward caused a famine that killed tens of millions of people." I suspect you never read commentary about the Great Leap Forward from the official gov.cn web sites... In other news, if we're here to sling dirt: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/31/23004339/uk-twitter-user-sentenced-grossly-offensive-tweet-tom-moore-joseph-kelly https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/31/23004339/uk-twitter-user-... Of course UK isn't in "EU country" any more, but hey, I don't have a habit of collecting human rights violations of other countries as a hobby.

keepamovin 3y ago

Tut tut, I thought you would have learned from the HK protests that no serious current event commentator is ever really interested in what the law actually says. I.E., The Basic Law.

jcranmer 3y ago

"Causing harm to the names, images, reputations, and honor of heroes and martyrs through insult, defamation, or other such means" pretty clearly means to me something along the lines of "you can't point out that Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward caused a famine that killed tens of millions of people." There's nothing along those lines in any EU country, let alone the US (where such a concept is in extremely flagrant violation of the First Amendment). The closest you'd come is laws against Holocaust denial--but notice the key difference between a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a "good" person might have done something bad versus a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a bad deed never happened.

aragonite 3y ago
"heroes and martyrs" is the English translation of 英雄烈士, which is not a generic term of praise in Chinese but specifically applies to someone who died in battle (or some similar act of bravery) — think acts worthy of Victoria Cross in UK or Purple Heart in US. Even people who worship Mao do not think of him as one of the "heroes and martyrs". In China you certainly can point out, even criticize, Mao's role in the Great Leap Forward. Even "Official History" criticizes Mao! You can't be too "over the top" about it, such as comparing him to Hitler or accuse him of being a mass murderer, lest you get cancelled. But the reason you can't has nothing to do with the draft laws being proposed here. > The closest you'd come is laws against Holocaust denial--but notice the key difference between a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a "good" person might have done something bad versus a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a bad deed never happened. If you make the first kind of claim and you are wrong, you falsely accuse an innocent person. If you make the second kind of claim and you are wrong, you unjustly exonerate a guilty person. Which is worse? I don't think there's a clear answer! So I fail to see the "key difference" you are trying to highlight between these kinds of claims. Of course, if one of them is true and the other false, then there's a clearly worse claim, but then the worse claim is worse because it's false, not because of the objectionable/offensive nature of its content.
- rawgabbit 3y ago
  The grandparent poster was referring to Peng Dehuai who dared to question the Great Leap Forward and was persecuted during the Cultural Revolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peng_Dehuai https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peng_Dehuai
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
hnfong 3y ago
> "you can't point out that Mao Zedong's Great Leap Forward caused a famine that killed tens of millions of people." I suspect you never read commentary about the Great Leap Forward from the official gov.cn web sites... In other news, if we're here to sling dirt: https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/31/23004339/uk-twitter-user-sentenced-grossly-offensive-tweet-tom-moore-joseph-kelly https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/31/23004339/uk-twitter-user-... Of course UK isn't in "EU country" any more, but hey, I don't have a habit of collecting human rights violations of other countries as a hobby.