On January 21 2010 15:37 {88}iNcontroL wrote: here we go with the china defense rofl
NOTHING BAD HAPPENS HERE GUYS
here we go with the china hate rofl
STOPPING SPAM? CHINA IS EVIL GUYS
The people of China aren't obsessed with monitoring everything the Chinese government does, because by and large, it does not inconvenience them, and, in this case, benefits them. But of course, people living half way around the world knows what's best for the Chinese people and will stop at nothing to denounce everything that happens in China in the name of "for the good of the Chinese people." You are not the Chinese people. If the Chinese people are truly discontent and inconvenienced by what the Chinese government does, the Chinese government would not be in power right now.
On January 21 2010 15:05 Robinsa wrote: Hilarious that people actually belive that it's a law to prevent spam. They could have got a legislation similar to those implemented in the US or Europe. If they have to create the law with "undisclosed criteras" it's obvious to me that they got something that they dont want to show.
That people in China say that it's nothing to be worried about doesnt suprise me the least. They are so fed with this bullshit from childhood that they actually belive it, Reminds of when I heard some friends arguing and when I aked them what was going on all the chinese guys pointed at the taiwanese guy and said "He says that Taiwan doesnt belong to China!!". Not that it's any proof of anything I've said previously, but I think it's a nice anecdote.
Also, I belive the article should say "It's a part of their campaign to regulate speech". Now, let the flame war begin.
You don't even know how to spell "believe" or "ask". You pretty much gave yourself away as an idiot before anybody had to reply!
Considering it says "Japan" I'd assume his native language isn't English, which as he clarifies in a later post, it isn't. No need for such animosity.
On January 21 2010 15:37 {88}iNcontroL wrote: here we go with the china defense rofl
NOTHING BAD HAPPENS HERE GUYS
here we go with the china hate rofl
STOPPING SPAM? CHINA IS EVIL GUYS
The people of China aren't obsessed with monitoring everything the Chinese government does, because by and large, it does not inconvenience them, and, in this case, benefits them. But of course, people living half way around the world knows what's best for the Chinese people and will stop at nothing to denounce everything that happens in China in the name of "for the good of the Chinese people." You are not the Chinese people. If the Chinese people are truly discontent and inconvenienced by what the Chinese government does, the Chinese government would not be in power right now.
Thats exactly the problem. Even if they are discontent with the government they wont even be able to text it without facing the risk of going to jail. I dont know what the chinese people want, but I agree with you; It would indeed be best if they could express themselves instead of someone else talkinig for them. Last time I checked people that actually spoke their mind in china ended up in jail, or worse.
They ended up in jail because their opinion did not represent the opinion of the majority of the Chinese people. If they did, there would be protests numbering beyond the few dozen activists you always hear about. It just means that what they were protesting did not concern the vast majority of the Chinese people.
On January 21 2010 16:24 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: They ended up in jail because their opinion did not represent the opinion of the majority of the Chinese people. If they did, there would be protests numbering beyond the few dozen activists you always hear about. It just means that what they were protesting did not concern the vast majority of the Chinese people.
Just out of curiosity, what are some of the things about China that you don't like?
On January 21 2010 16:24 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: They ended up in jail because their opinion did not represent the opinion of the majority of the Chinese people. If they did, there would be protests numbering beyond the few dozen activists you always hear about. It just means that what they were protesting did not concern the vast majority of the Chinese people.
Well I guess we differ on that point. I do belive that people other than the majority should be allowed to speak their mind. I would go as far as to say that ANY chinese should be allowed to speak his mind, like you and me.
With this in memory it's no wonder people dont protest in masses no more:
The bureaucracy and compulsive obsession with it is one of the things that irk me about it. It goes against the general Chinese goal of results/efficiency. It's gotten better in recent years, but there's still much to do. It's also a breeding ground for corruption, which is why it has gotten a lot of attention lately and why the situation is improving. It's mostly a relic from the dynastic eras I guess, which is one of the drawbacks of the Chinese belief in traditionalism - mistakes and inefficiencies do tend to take a while to be corrected, even though they're usually recognized very early.
Another thing is the generally atrocious state of public bathrooms. They are the most disgusting places on the face of the planet TBH. I understand that China has 1.3 billion people, but come on, like, seriously. And you even have to pay to use some of them lol. If you open a bathroom for pay, the least you could do is make sure there is a modicum of hygiene involved.
@ robinsa
Protests are destabilizing in nature, and destabilization tends to lead to a lot of harm for no real net result. Refer to my post earlier in the thread - it usually ends up being a period of chaos and ends up in another regime that's the exact same as every other one before it in everything except its name, because that's the only really efficient way to govern China. This is a case where the beliefs and rights of the individual have to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
Protests are destabilizing in nature, and destabilization tends to lead to a lot of harm for no real net result. Refer to my post earlier in the thread - it usually ends up being a period of chaos and ends up in another regime that's the exact same as every other one before it in everything except its name, because that's the only really efficient way to govern China. This is a case where the beliefs and rights of the individual have to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
It seems like the civil rights movement in the USA is a very clear refutation of your argument. Am I wrong?
On January 21 2010 16:31 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Protests are destabilizing in nature, and destabilization tends to lead to a lot of harm for no real net result. Refer to my post earlier in the thread - it usually ends up being a period of chaos and ends up in another regime that's the exact same as every other one before it in everything except its name, because that's the only really efficient way to govern China. This is a case where the beliefs and rights of the individual have to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
On January 21 2010 16:37 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote: It seems like the civil rights movement in the USA is a very clear refutation of your argument. Am I wrong?
How does the civil rights movement have to do with protests relating to the governance of China? Politically and culturally, the scenario is entirely different, and not very comparable.
The history of the USA is different from the history of China. The cultural attitudes of the US allowed for it to work; the same scenario in China would've changed nothing. I would even go as far to say that the 1989 protests are, themselves, a proof of my statement - people died, and, ultimately, nothing changed. The end. The people of China simply need a stable overarching government, there's no way around it. Any challenges to the authority of the government destabilizes it and throws the country into chaos that would be better avoided.
On January 21 2010 16:31 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Protests are destabilizing in nature, and destabilization tends to lead to a lot of harm for no real net result. Refer to my post earlier in the thread - it usually ends up being a period of chaos and ends up in another regime that's the exact same as every other one before it in everything except its name, because that's the only really efficient way to govern China. This is a case where the beliefs and rights of the individual have to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
On January 21 2010 16:37 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote: It seems like the civil rights movement in the USA is a very clear refutation of your argument. Am I wrong?
How does the civil rights movement have to do with protests relating to the governance of China?
Are you saying that Sheep's point is: Protests maybe good in the west but in China they are "destabilizing in nature...[that] lead to a lot of harm for no real net result" ?
My point is that protests can lead to lasting, positive change -- that is, "real net result[s]".
On January 21 2010 16:31 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Protests are destabilizing in nature, and destabilization tends to lead to a lot of harm for no real net result. Refer to my post earlier in the thread - it usually ends up being a period of chaos and ends up in another regime that's the exact same as every other one before it in everything except its name, because that's the only really efficient way to govern China. This is a case where the beliefs and rights of the individual have to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
On January 21 2010 16:37 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote: It seems like the civil rights movement in the USA is a very clear refutation of your argument. Am I wrong?
How does the civil rights movement have to do with protests relating to the governance of China?
Are you saying that Sheep's point is: Protests maybe good in the west but in China they are "destabilizing in nature...[that] lead to a lot of harm for no real net result" ?
My point is that protests can lead to lasting, positive change -- that is, "real net result[s]".
Is this wrong?
Protests in China, as they have in history, go beyond their original intended scope, and thus becomes an arbitrary, often unreasonable set of mixed demands that does nothing besides destabilize the country. As a result, they either get crushed, or they succeed, but they become yet another governing body that eventually imposes the same rules in order to maintain order.
On January 21 2010 16:42 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: The history of the USA is different from the history of China. The cultural attitudes of the US allowed for it to work; the same scenario in China would've changed nothing. I would even go as far to say that the 1989 protests are, themselves, a proof of my statement - people died, and, ultimately, nothing changed. The end. The people of China simply need a stable overarching government, there's no way around it. Any challenges to the authority of the government destabilizes it and throws the country into chaos that would be better avoided.
You could certainly be right that "the people of china simply need a stable overarching government..." However, it is also true that if a group of individuals wanted to remain in power that would be a very convenient argument to use to justify the actions they use to maintain stability.
Which leads to my next question: Are you parents Chinese? What do they do? Are they connected to the government?
On January 21 2010 16:31 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: @ robinsa
Protests are destabilizing in nature, and destabilization tends to lead to a lot of harm for no real net result. Refer to my post earlier in the thread - it usually ends up being a period of chaos and ends up in another regime that's the exact same as every other one before it in everything except its name, because that's the only really efficient way to govern China. This is a case where the beliefs and rights of the individual have to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
This is where our opinions differ I guess. Even though I do agree that some people are disposable for the greater good I do not belive they can be classified as that because political views, but rather on actions. I must however say that I deeply respect you for actually giving an honest answer. Really nice to see someone from the "china side" bring an actual argument and not just go "China hater". Big kudos.
lol "Hey guys, we're gonna read all your texts to each other but it's okay because we're doing it to catch pedos and pedos have no rights anyway and you're all potential pedos so you all potentially have no rights. So it's fine."
This is a huge invasion of privacy. I'm amazed they have the audacity to attempt this.
On January 21 2010 16:51 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote: Which leads to my next question: Are you parents Chinese? What do they do? Are they connected to the government?
I am ethnically Chinese, yes, and both my parents are full blooded ethnic Chinese. I was born in the USA, but spent approximately half of the first 8 years of my life in China, alternated with time spent in the US.
My parents were both born in China, and no, they're not connected to the government. They lived in China for the first half of their lives, going to college and then working for a few years in China before coming to the US for graduate school, where they settled. I am currently attending college in NYC, but make regular visits to China, as my grandparents and various uncles/cousins/other relatives still live there.
However, it is also true that if a group of individuals wanted to remain in power that would be a very convenient argument to use to justify the actions they use to maintain stability.
Again, if the Chinese government were displeased and angered enough, the CCP would not be in power right now. The fact that they're in power and have people defending their actions is proof that what they're doing is beneficial to the majority of the people. Dynastic changes in Chinese history were always, without fail, brought on by tyrannical rule that angered the people. Droughts and famines played a part, but if it was a wise and just, or even average, ruler, without a reputation of failures (warranted or unwarranted), there would not be enough cause for a revolution. It matters little what the government says, all that matters is the effects of the actions.
This is where our opinions differ I guess. Even though I do agree that some people are disposable for the greater good I do not belive they can be classified as that because political views, but rather on actions. I must however say that I deeply respect you for actually giving an honest answer. Really nice to see someone from the "china side" bring an actual argument and not just go "China hater". Big kudos.
I mean, the difference in opinion can really go so far. Think about a democracy - if you're in the US, let's say you voted for McCain and not Obama. Your beliefs have been sacrificed in favor of the belief o the majority, and so Obama is now president, despite a sizable portion of the populace objecting to it.
On January 21 2010 16:57 KwarK wrote: lol "Hey guys, we're gonna read all your texts to each other but it's okay because we're doing it to catch pedos and pedos have no rights anyway and you're all potential pedos so you all potentially have no rights. So it's fine."
This is a huge invasion of privacy. I'm amazed they have the audacity to attempt this.
Again, this goes back to my point on the different priorities that the Chinese people place on things compared to a western populace. For China, eliminating spam SMSs (a mundane, common, everday problem) and the benefits much outweigh the vague idea that some people might be having private texts read and censored. "Hey, I don't send any questionable texts, and this could only bring me a positive benefit. Hurray government regulation!" is the general thought process for most of the population. As the NY Times article demonstrates, this is thought of a gross invasion of privacy and downright appalling by western standards. In china, the reaction is basically the complete opposite.
On January 21 2010 15:37 {88}iNcontroL wrote: here we go with the china defense rofl
NOTHING BAD HAPPENS HERE GUYS
here we go with the china hate rofl
STOPPING SPAM? CHINA IS EVIL GUYS
The people of China aren't obsessed with monitoring everything the Chinese government does, because by and large, it does not inconvenience them, and, in this case, benefits them. But of course, people living half way around the world knows what's best for the Chinese people and will stop at nothing to denounce everything that happens in China in the name of "for the good of the Chinese people." You are not the Chinese people. If the Chinese people are truly discontent and inconvenienced by what the Chinese government does, the Chinese government would not be in power right now.
In the video provided by Robinsa which displays the last memorable attempt to organize a peaceful movement against the government you can clearly see unarmed people being shot and killed for simply displaying their "discontent." When I see human beings that happen to reside within your borders speaking out for basic human rights and freedoms being killed it becomes a concern of mine and many others; whether you like it or not.
On January 21 2010 17:06 7Strife wrote: In the video provided by Robinsa which displays the last memorable attempt to organize a peaceful movement against the government you can clearly see unarmed people being shot and killed for simply displaying their "discontent." When I see human beings that happen to reside within your borders speaking out for basic human rights and freedoms being killed it becomes a concern of mine and many others; whether you like it or not.
Yes, it did indeed start out as a peaceful movement, with the intent of bettering Chinese society. Most people in china recognize that. However, this peaceful movement also outgrew itself. My grandparents, parents, and other relatives were all in Beijing during that. What happened was not a peaceful march on Washington like in the USA civil rights movement. What happened was a few students calling for rights around the city, and hoards of people taking this as an opportunity to riot, steal, loot, and kill. In a country with such a huge population density, chaos spreads quickly and is difficult to contain. For a Chinese citizen whose house got broken into and his properties looted because some other people decided to protest about something he doesn't care about, he becomes angry and does NOT want these protests, whatever their intent, to continue, because they're bringing him only harm. Again, it's about the needs of the many versus the needs of the few.
EPT
