|
On September 29 2010 10:06 jpak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 09:59 Half wrote:On September 29 2010 09:57 jpak wrote:On September 29 2010 09:53 Half wrote:but that's not a government-sponsored activity (I will not elaborate on that due to lack of info, but it's safe to say that much). North Korea CHOOSES to send those people who flee because the government fails to provide basic needs to camps.
Very naive aren't you. 50% of the Mexican Government has close ties to drug Cartels. 50% is not 100%. NK is 100%. It's government POLICY to deal with defectors in that matter (the corruption in there is actually border guards getting bribes to look the other way). What you're talking about is corruption, which is not unique to just Mexico. Policy doesn't mean anything, its actions that matter. Again, I can't elaborate on the situation in Mexico, because of lack of info (perhaps you would like to enlighten me and the rest of TL on that). What I'm truly mad about, however, is how little the situation of refugees in Northeast China is talked about compared to the situation in Mexico, even in outside communities. I guess drugs highlight attention, and/or the Chinese are good at shutting voices up on that issue.
Actually I think I misunderstood the comparison your making :/. I retract my previous comment lol.
|
Ok It's one thing to say a populace is not ready for major change (such as a transition to democracy) but it's another to say that they aren't ready for fundamental human rights that the Chinese government's denies them.
ALL people should be able to express their opinions (I wish some wouldn't, as we all do) but its that simple. Human rights are human rights, and everybody, every single human being (unless they've done something grotesque to deserve their revocation) deserves to have them honored. But in China this is not the case for some people which is why I'm hesitant to believe anything they Chinese government says, unless some changes take place.
That said, China also has some serious serious environmental issues that should arguably take precedence over anything political at this juncture. Pollution, flooding, over development, CO2 emissions (they have now overtaken the U.S.) are just a few. While they are the largest producers of renewable energy, they also have the largest economic growth which they are apparently unwilling to sacrifice (can't blame them) for the environment.
|
On September 29 2010 10:06 jpak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 09:59 Half wrote:On September 29 2010 09:57 jpak wrote:On September 29 2010 09:53 Half wrote:but that's not a government-sponsored activity (I will not elaborate on that due to lack of info, but it's safe to say that much). North Korea CHOOSES to send those people who flee because the government fails to provide basic needs to camps.
Very naive aren't you. 50% of the Mexican Government has close ties to drug Cartels. 50% is not 100%. NK is 100%. It's government POLICY to deal with defectors in that matter (the corruption in there is actually border guards getting bribes to look the other way). What you're talking about is corruption, which is not unique to just Mexico. Policy doesn't mean anything, its actions that matter. Again, I can't elaborate on the situation in Mexico, because of lack of info (perhaps you would like to enlighten me and the rest of TL on that). What I'm truly mad about, however, is how little the situation of refugees in Northeast China is talked about compared to the situation in Mexico, even in outside communities. I guess drugs highlight attention, and/or the Chinese are good at shutting voices up on that issue.
I'm possibly missing the topic of argument here but I don't see how this has to do with the topic. (Assuming any thread with China stays on topic at all ...) The refugees you discuss do not actually have official refugee status in China. A majority of it are illegal immigrants that you speak of, much like what occurred after the US denied Cambodians refugee status after American blunders in the region occurred. While the situation is very much unfortunate, I'm not sure where you were going with the whole thing.
On September 29 2010 10:13 MadVillain wrote:
Ok It's one thing to say a populace is not ready for major change (such as a transition to democracy) but it's another to say that they aren't ready for fundamental human rights that the Chinese government's denies them.
ALL people should be able to express their opinions (I wish some wouldn't, as we all do) but its that simple. Human rights are human rights, and everybody, every single human being (unless they've done something grotesque to deserve their revocation) deserves to have them honored. But in China this is not the case for some people which is why I'm hesitant to believe anything they Chinese government says, unless some changes take place.
That said, China also has some serious serious environmental issues that should arguably take precedence over anything political at this juncture. Pollution, flooding, over development, CO2 emissions (they have now overtaken the U.S.) are just a few. While they are the largest producers of renewable energy, they also have the largest economic growth which they are apparently unwilling to sacrifice (can't blame them) for the environment.
Valid points but I should point out, you are never truly free as long as you allow a government over you. You are always limited in your freedom in exchange for the security your nation provides you. Obviously you pick and choose accordingly accordingly. But the idea that Western ideals are the only thing that provides human freedoms are naive and notably biased.
|
This is getting so off-topic :D
|
On September 29 2010 09:45 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
Freedom of expression is overrated. The only people who actually have time to express themselves are people who are well off enough that everyday survival isn't their priority (which is a minority in China).
Democracy won't make China better at this moment. The majority of people aren't educated enough to make intelligent decisions and it would open way for scams and exploits.
This is completely wrong. The current regimes primary victims are in fact, the sustenance class, those who are actively working just to put food on the table, the uneducated, the lower class. The rest are protesters, who are prosecuted because of protests. If your poor there is a very real chance the government can legitimately screw you over completely, and you given no way to legally redress the issue. If you speak out, you are beaten. You don't get the pomp of any "secret police". Thats reserved for lofty professors. No, police officers literally just start punching you on the streets. These are the real victims, and there are woefully little people from the East or West to tell there stories. Anyone else who is prosecuted or killed primarily for three reasons-Part of the Falun Gun, Actively advocating Tibetan succession, or protesting against aforementioned grievances and the arrest of protesters itself. These people are a minority. Which isn't to marginalize them, but not the real issue at hand because two of the three are basically heavily tied to the injustice on regional, provincial levels.
If you're poor and barely able to put food on the table, what can the government do to screw you over? Shoot you? Take your kids? The current regime officially doesn't treat their people unfairly.. its the corrupt officials in between that takes advantage of the uneducated people.
Making things democratic won't un-corrupt these people. In fact, it would make it easier for create corrupted representative pretending to cater to your interest so you will vote for him.
The only way for China to change, is for everyone to become more educated. This is slowly happening but it will take time.
|
On September 29 2010 09:00 aimaimaim wrote:tl;dr the whole thread .. but he DID violate chinese law .. 
Did he? It isn't really that clear cut--remember after all that freedom of speech is guaranteed by the Chinese constitution, and he claims his views are not subversive at all but merely progressive suggestions.
|
Okay, this is great discussion. Pretty knowledgeable, people fighting views with views, largely centrist discussion instead of polarized, etc. People not in the know ask questions instead imposing their ignorance on others.
Where was this when people were making shit up in the china/japan thread? I was the only one to speak earnestly there.
|
having lived in china gotta say that if the chinese feel like they lack "basic human rights" that's not stopping them from being (generally) much happier than americans and much more proud of their country
Democracy is not needed in china or even called for by the general populace.
I imagine a good comparison to advocates of democracy in china would be advocates of communism in the U.S during the 50's
|
On September 29 2010 10:14 KissBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 10:06 jpak wrote:On September 29 2010 09:59 Half wrote:On September 29 2010 09:57 jpak wrote:On September 29 2010 09:53 Half wrote:but that's not a government-sponsored activity (I will not elaborate on that due to lack of info, but it's safe to say that much). North Korea CHOOSES to send those people who flee because the government fails to provide basic needs to camps.
Very naive aren't you. 50% of the Mexican Government has close ties to drug Cartels. 50% is not 100%. NK is 100%. It's government POLICY to deal with defectors in that matter (the corruption in there is actually border guards getting bribes to look the other way). What you're talking about is corruption, which is not unique to just Mexico. Policy doesn't mean anything, its actions that matter. Again, I can't elaborate on the situation in Mexico, because of lack of info (perhaps you would like to enlighten me and the rest of TL on that). What I'm truly mad about, however, is how little the situation of refugees in Northeast China is talked about compared to the situation in Mexico, even in outside communities. I guess drugs highlight attention, and/or the Chinese are good at shutting voices up on that issue. I'm possibly missing the topic of argument here but I don't see how this has to do with the topic. (Assuming any thread with China stays on topic at all ...) The refugees you discuss do not actually have official refugee status in China. A majority of it are illegal immigrants that you speak of, much like what occurred after the US denied Cambodians refugee status after American blunders in the region occurred. While the situation is very much unfortunate, I'm not sure where you were going with the whole thing.
In my first post I already stated that they're basically GHOSTS in China with no legal status. Do these NKs qualify to be refugees? I'll go by the U.N definition:
"A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country;"
If you go by the bold part of the definition, NKs in China can definitely be considered refugees (in case you say "OH, it's hunger, which is purely economic problem" I'll tell you that, according to defectors who successfully made the unusually long journey to South Korea , even complaining about a particular day's ration is considered enough reason to be sent to camp because that is seen as the state being less than perfect. The State sees it as a political threat, which is to say that complaining about being hungry is a political opinion, in this case). Yet, China refuses to recognize them as such, even though they're part of the U.N and in agreement with the definition set by the Convention above, and they're promptly sent back if caught.
In my original post, I was just venting my own frustration that I had with China, and I was just meaning to share that. I think it's for the good of this topic that we stop discussing about this here for the time being.
|
I m Chinese, not currently residing in China and I would have agreed to have him arrested.
In China there is a difference between criticizing the gov policy and calling for a revolt. The tone of Charter 08 is more associated with revolt. The language of the text clearly played with ppl's fear and exaggerated the current situation in PRC like it was in the days of Qing.
In the West, such action is probably tolerable, but China such declarations are typical red herring for revolutions. If he is genuine about making changes in the best interest of the ppl, he should have taken a more moderate approach.
|
On September 29 2010 10:29 LaoShuAiDaMi wrote:
having lived in china gotta say that if the chinese feel like they lack "basic human rights" that's not stopping them from being (generally) much happier than americans and much more proud of their country
Democracy is not needed in china or even called for by the general populace.
I imagine a good comparison to advocates of democracy in china would be advocates of communism in the U.S during the 50's
I agree with this 100%. A new revolution / governmental reform is pretty much the last thing Chinese people want anyway, so freedom of speech isn't much of an issue.
Also, I love your username XD
|
Most people assume that the Chinese government holds power over the people when it's quite the opposite. History has shown REPEATEDLY, China has always been ruled by the people. The idea of Mandate of Heaven has been prevalent throughout society. In fact, one can argue that Mao's Communist government had already been overthrown as soon as Deng came into power. Chinese politics have always operated under a very simple system. Don't fuck up or people will have your head on a pike. A pity the US doesn't work the same way since we're still ennuied with the notion that two party system is the only way to go *sigh*. =(
|
On September 29 2010 10:46 synapse wrote:
I agree with this 100%. A new revolution / governmental reform is pretty much the last thing Chinese people want anyway, so freedom of speech isn't much of an issue.
Also, I love your username XD
well there is nothing wrong with gov reforms. the gov is reforming every day as we speak. China is one of the first countries with a solid plan to implement carbon tax!
anyways, there are true patriots like 孙中山 who wholeheartedly try to reform the gov for the benefit of the ppl. but then there are also ppl who stir up troubles for personal fame and gains.
Liu's declaration focused more on humiliating the current gov and cause chaos rather than genuinely helping the ppl's cause. don't just talk about freedom and democracy. do something constructive like start building 200,000km of railroad!
|
That's actually what I hate most about where US politics are currently headed. It's a WHOLE LOT OF TALK and a WHOLE LOT LESS OF DO.
Kind of like what my friend Charlotte (she's Brit), pointed out about Obama. DO NOTHING; WIN NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.
Meanwhile, people still bitch at Bloomberg because he's big money despite the fact that he was the one person keeping the NYC ship afloat.
|
I think he should get it just because he was imprisoned for trying to better China. If he had not been sentenced to prison time he would have never been considered for this.
|
On September 29 2010 10:54 KissBlade wrote:
Most people assume that the Chinese government holds power over the people when it's quite the opposite. History has shown REPEATEDLY, China has always been ruled by the people. The idea of Mandate of Heaven has been prevalent throughout society. In fact, one can argue that Mao's Communist government had already been overthrown as soon as Deng came into power. Chinese politics have always operated under a very simple system. Don't fuck up or people will have your head on a pike. A pity the US doesn't work the same way since we're still ennuied with the notion that two party system is the only way to go *sigh*. =(
Not that literally.
I do think Chinese people trust the central government to take an expanded view and act toward the long-term prosperity of the majority, and do indeed look the other way when gov, excluding corruption, skim off the top a bit or knock a few heads. It's a choice a collectivist society would make.
This is in direct contrast to the west where there's never not been fear and suspicion of large central authority, where through out the ages the house of kings and noblesmen are a den of snakes. People trust the laws of competition to pit power against power to find a sense of balance.
|
On September 29 2010 11:01 KissBlade wrote:
That's actually what I hate most about where US politics are currently headed. It's a WHOLE LOT OF TALK and a WHOLE LOT LESS OF DO.
Kind of like what my friend Charlotte (she's Brit), pointed out about Obama. DO NOTHING; WIN NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.
Meanwhile, people still bitch at Bloomberg because he's big money despite the fact that he was the one person keeping the NYC ship afloat.
Some might argue that that was the way America was designed. This GRIDLOCK in American politics emphasizes the fact that if anything is going to get done in Congress, it has endure the debates and the fights. Now is it an outdated system of government? Maybe. You can look up on this issue of Gridlock in American politics online.
My comment is a little sloppy, but I hope you get the point.
|
On September 29 2010 11:06 GreEny K wrote:
I think he should get it just because he was imprisoned for trying to better China. If he had not been sentenced to prison time he would have never been considered for this.
there are a ton of students like him in China who are very outspoken about freedom and democracy. they are more of an annoyance than anything else. alot of em are loose cannons that end up causing more damage to the society they are trying to help.
the real ones that deserve nobel prizes are those who actually did something to help and done so selflessly.
Deng Xiao Ping being a great example. He cleaned up all the mess left behind by the early generation of hardcore communists. He disagreed strongly against the hardline policies but he did not revolt despite having the power to do so.
of course, he would not have gotten a nobel prize because he did not put a revolt to rest, he just PREVENTED it from happening.
|
China is a horrible place that does terrible things. From human rights to pollution to censorship to executions they are the worst. If you disagree they send you to a "reeducation camp" or maybe just kill you. They force abortion all the time and hate religion (because it calls for human rights/equality, they want atheist sheep). Its unbelievably messed up in China and I feel bad for the majority of the people who live there who have to suffer.
I don't care about Nobel peace prizes or anything but this is where I like liberals in that they take on a common enemy aka China. I hope they keep pressuring China constantly and make them change but I think the revolt will come from the Chinese people when they get fed up with government. It would be nice to see the revolution but with 2 billion people I hope it comes more as a revelation than a huge bloody conflict.
|
after obama winning the last one for doing nothing i have lost most of my respect for the nobel peace prize. Hence, I don't care who wins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
