China Riot

On July 09 2009 18:28 CharlieMurphy wrote:
can you use the link button, your shit fucked up the page format.

On July 09 2009 18:28 CharlieMurphy wrote:
can you use the link button, your shit fucked up the page format.

Pics look pretty hectic, what the hell is this all about anyways?

On July 09 2009 18:45 evanthebouncy! wrote:


In short, just an Ethnic riot, you can relate it to some of the strife in middle east, although far smaller in scale. Still very significant though, China is normally fairly under control.

On July 09 2009 19:26 skronch wrote:
yes, at least with most of my co-workers i talked to here, they have the general idea that something is going on that the government doesn't want them to know about, but it seems like they aren't really intent on trying to figure out what it is. i don't think they're really use to having any options to obtain their news in the first place.

but really, it's fucking bullshit that they blocked facebook. that is all

On July 09 2009 21:25 Boblion wrote:
Just believe what your governement tells you, there is nothing to discuss in political threads about China anyway.
Damn spoiled white kids. They CAN'T understand.

On July 09 2009 21:42 Judicator wrote:


Agree, most telling sign of the ethnic ignorance in Western culture (especially the US) is the recently deceased Robert McNamara who stressed before his death that the Vietnam War (that he led) was a mistake because at the time they really didn't know any better.

The same can be said for the Middle East and the same can be said here. When you read news and reports of foreign conflicts, you need to first dispose of whatever model of thinking you are using, it doesn't work that way and it only leads to distorted views. In other words, you are no better than Fox News if you don't

On July 09 2009 22:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
He's right now though. But it doesn't mean foreigners can't talk about China from their perspectives.

On July 09 2009 22:39 Xe(-_-)Ro wrote:

If you don't want our opinions that are "irrelevant" IE foreign why then are you bring it up on foreign boards... seems redudant to me.

On July 09 2009 22:15 Boblion wrote:
Oh well i will be honest and edit. In this particular thread it was just omnimo.
However i find this kind of affirmation in every thread about China and it is just annoying.

Seriously this is the lamest thing you can find when you are arguing with people:
"You don't live here, you can't understand".

On July 09 2009 22:55 KissBlade wrote:



On the other hand, can you honestly declare you do understand the situation? Very often, I find you post the same drivel in any China thread and it always seems to be talking about government control regardless of the topic. Similarly, I doubt you can name many Chinese political leaders nor describe how the current political system works without looking up wikipedia.

On July 09 2009 23:11 ghrur wrote:
Well, both points have merit.
On one hand, sure, we shouldn't say, "If you don't live here, you don't really understand,"
but on the other hand, if you were to understand, you do need to shed your ideals for a bit and look at it from another point of view, which people hardly ever do and thus cause mis-understandings.

On July 09 2009 23:25 ghrur wrote:
Not really, the people inside understand more than you think.
They understand they're living in a very unstable region, at least I did. They also understand that the gov't isn't exactly truthful, lol or that their next president isn't chosen by them.

On July 09 2009 23:17 MK wrote:


Tbh, imo, people from the outside understand much more than the ones inside
Especially when the freespech is pretty unfree...

On July 09 2009 23:06 Boblion wrote:

Thanks for proving my point.

but, ANW, back to the topic : what is the point of the fight ? For independence ? If that, why kill random Han ?

On July 10 2009 00:05 Flaccid wrote:
Uighur Riots Teach China to Spin



Uighurs have been complaining of unfair government treatment for ages. Now with the deaths of a few of their own over false accusations at a factory, they have some attention and want to grab at it. The presense of foreign press may have made it worthwhile for the group of women who protested against the detainment of their relatives following the factory brawl to step out - which ultimately sparked the riots.

The point, as far as I can tell, is to draw national attention to their cause.

The worker was held for allegedly posting a false report on a Web site claiming two girls had been raped by a half-dozen men at the Xuri Toy Factory in Shaoguan City in Guangdong province in southern China.

The posting led to a Thursday night confrontation between hundreds of workers from the Xuri plant and employees from another factory in Xinjiang, the Xinhua news agency reported Sunday.

Xinhua said further investigation turned up no reports of any sexual assaults. Police determined the former worker had posted the rumor after quitting his job and failing to be rehired.

On July 09 2009 23:29 MK wrote:


I ain't saying they don't understand. I'm saying people from the outside understand better, or indeed, could understand better.

Actually, from the inside, I ain't even sure it's "understand" but maybe more like "aware". Difficult to think without freedom so hard to understand


but, ANW, back to the topic : what is the point of the fight ? For independence ? If that, why kill random Han ?

On July 09 2009 23:57 Velr wrote:
From an outside view looking in this tread i get this image of china:


It's ok to slaughter down riots and non chinese people are not able tell if this is bad (or not) because it all has something to do with Chinese culture...

It's obviously also ok that the goverment lies to it's people because it has something to do with Chinese culture...

Alltogether i come to the conclusion:
Chinese culture is a sad excuse for goverment crimes and various other stuff that happens in China.

On July 10 2009 00:03 KissBlade wrote:



Your point is that you never have any understanding of the topic and decide to post anyway?

Similarly, I doubt you can name many Chinese political leaders nor describe how the current political system works without looking up wikipedia.

Your point is that you never have any understanding of the topic and decide to post anyway?

On the other hand, can you honestly declare you do understand the situation?

Very often, I find you post the same drivel in any China thread and it always seems to be talking about government control regardless of the topic.

On July 10 2009 00:46 Alizee- wrote:



***BEST*** post in this thread by MILES. gg.

On July 10 2009 00:56 Boblion wrote:

My point is that you are using things like that as your main arguments:









Basicly this can be summarized as:
"You are not Chinese so you don't know and you shouldn't talk about those issues."

The bolded parts are just a nice collection of assumptions.

On July 10 2009 01:00 reincremate wrote:

No one said it was okay to "slaughter down riots" or what have you. Also, no one was using "Chinese culture" as a justification for government oppression or censorship. Posters in China were just pointing out that you can't fully trust both foreign and Chinese media because they are biased, and that if your only source of knowledge on the subject is the western media, then your opinions aren't as valid as people who have lived in China and who also have access to the same foreign news sources as well as first-hand experience.

i think people saying things like that are what drive omnimo and the rest crazy. it's a fucking ridiculous statement. sure you can read the news but merely reading a limited stream of information doesn't make you understand the situation better than someone living in the area.

On July 10 2009 01:17 MK wrote:


If you are outside and in a freespeech country, you can have both inside and outside information, you can freespeech so you can debate and construct your vision and reflexion from other people's opinions.
Plus, you are outside, you are more likely to think with the head and not think with the heart. It's easier to be abstractive when it's not your country.

I'm ok if you tell me : you can't feel what it is if you are not inside but don't tell me you can't understand.

On July 10 2009 01:17 MK wrote:


If you are outside and in a freespeech country, you can have both inside and outside information, you can freespeech so you can debate and construct your vision and reflexion from other people's opinions.
Plus, you are outside, you are more likely to think with the head and not think with the heart. It's easier to be abstractive when it's not your country.

I'm ok if you tell me : you can't feel what it is if you are not inside but don't tell me you can't understand.

On July 10 2009 01:15 Boblion wrote:

The main difference between "Western" countries and China is that you can find different sources of information ranging from ultra left to ultra right.
Censorship is a very marginal problem contrarily to China ( and you will find people protesting or even demonstrating against censorship ).

On July 10 2009 01:17 MK wrote:


If you are outside and in a freespeech country, you can have both inside and outside information, you can freespeech so you can debate and construct your vision and reflexion from other people's opinions.
Plus, you are outside, you are more likely to think with the head and not think with the heart. It's easier to be abstractive when it's not your country.

I'm ok if you tell me : you can't feel what it is if you are not inside but don't tell me you can't understand.

On July 10 2009 01:55 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Boblion why do you complain about your rights to open debate if you don't know anything about the situation.

On July 10 2009 01:55 ZeeTemplar wrote:
Maybe someone can elaborate the difference between Han chinese and other groups of chinese citizens in China

On July 10 2009 01:43 zulu_nation8 wrote:


The "information" or "facts" of the situation are the same everywhere and from CCTV, unless western media have their individual sources who are undercover and reporting from Xin Jiang illegally.

On July 10 2009 01:55 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Boblion why do you complain about your rights to open debate if you don't know anything about the situation.

On July 10 2009 01:30 zulu_nation8 wrote:


You can't understand because you are not aware of the historical and cultural context these types of conflicts are embedded in. In terms of information you don't have "inside" information unless you speak Chinese.

On July 10 2009 02:01 Boblion wrote:

If the "information" and the "facts" are the same why censorship is needed ?



Ah ?
And how do you know that i don't know anything ?
You are making assumptions like Kissblade.

On July 10 2009 02:01 Boblion wrote:

If the "information" and the "facts" are the same why censorship is needed ?



Ah ?
And how do you know that i don't know anything ?
You are making assumptions like Kissblade.

I know you don't anything because everything you've said in this thread hints that you don't know what you're talking about.

On July 10 2009 02:04 MK wrote:


Oh, damn, I actually speak Chinese. I can read it too. Wow ! And I'm not in china ! How comes ?
Well, you know, there is a thing called School and also a thing called education.

Com'on, stop being so stubborn. If what you say is true, many major Historians, Economists and other Scientists are just useless and write crap. So hope you are wrong.

And yeah, definitely, I agree with KissBlade. The point is how deep are people willing to search even when they can have all the information.

On July 10 2009 02:04 KissBlade wrote:



You've proven in your post that you don't know anything . So far combing through your post, you've demonstrated zero knowledge on the topic. In fact, you haven't even posted any relevant information.

@zulu_nation8, I think you're being a little extreme on the matter too =P.

On July 10 2009 02:16 Boblion wrote:

Well i was just trying to explain why it is pointless to discuss about China with people like you. I wasn't talking about this ethnic riot, because you would repeat the exact same words ("you are not Chinese so you don't know" ) if i cared enough to explain my opinion on this issue.

On July 10 2009 02:14 zulu_nation8 wrote:


Ok you can speak Chinese, tell me how the western media gives the public more information about the riots than the Chinese media. How do you make that leap with the historians and what not? This is politics, it's not an objective science.

On July 10 2009 02:11 zulu_nation8 wrote:
The Chinese media censors stuff for a variety of reasons. But it's true that even during the Tibetan riots of last year you could still obtain information from most of the western news sites except for a few like CNN and BBC which China blocked to prove a point to them instead of trying to hide information.

I know you don't anything because everything you've said in this thread hints that you don't know what you're talking about.

On July 10 2009 02:25 Boblion wrote:

If they allowed you to obtain information from "the western news sites" what they were trying to prove by blocking CNN or BBC ?
Don't you think they were just not able to block any kind of sites with information about the Tibetan riots so they just tried to block the most important ?
Maybe i'm just too naive


Please feel free to quote those "hints" as i said in my previous post i wasn't even discussing about the riots.

On July 10 2009 02:19 zulu_nation8 wrote:


It's pointless because you have no knowledge of the subject at hand, hence all your opinions are ungrounded because you refuse to learn more before making opinions. Is that unfair to say? Can you stop complaining now.

On July 10 2009 02:21 MK wrote:


And Bonus (not so) unrelated-question : Why they cut Facebook, Twitter, Blogger etc. ?

On July 10 2009 02:30 Boblion wrote:

I don't complain. I'm just trying to make a demonstration of why threads about China on TL are useless and will always end up in a flame war.
But have fun i'm leaving.

On July 10 2009 02:25 Boblion wrote:

If they allowed you to obtain information from "the western news sites" what they were trying to prove by blocking CNN or BBC ?
Don't you think they were just not able to block any kind of sites with information about the Tibetan riots so they just tried to block the most important ?
Maybe i'm just too naive


Please feel free to quote those "hints" as i said in my previous post i wasn't even discussing about the riots.

On July 10 2009 02:37 zulu_nation8 wrote:
..., which is logical since you're not Chinese. You should then realize whatever opinions you have based on what you know are probably not very educated. I'm not condescending towards you so please don't take it personal.

On July 10 2009 02:35 MK wrote:
Ok, I make it simple : for me, even economics or biology or statistics are not objective science. Not abstractive enough.
But please, don't wanna talk about it, I have enough noisy useless debate at school about that and it's out topic here.
Plus, Politics, in many Western countries, is considered as Science (Human Science... oh, Economics too is in this same category !).

And, when you say "At most the example shows the western media gives less facts than the CCTV.", you must be kidding me or just trolling or being extremely naive.

And yes, to anticipate your next move : please, show me some examples.

Good Night, I give you the whole night to find examples

On July 10 2009 02:41 KissBlade wrote:


I agree with you up until this point. As I've said before, this attitude HAS to stop simply because it makes you and many others look bad. There is no disqualification on validity about a topic simply because you aren't from that country. There are people who's actually researched and studied the topic before. Obviously people like Bobolion haven't but your blanket terminology is a bit uncalled for.

On July 10 2009 03:16 BisuBoi wrote:
The saddest thing in this thread is that people in the West think they are free. Western civilization is hardly more free than China's. The media just has more sophisticated methods of propaganda. And it's a Western prerogative to trash talk China. Insecurity about world dominance anyone?

On July 10 2009 03:21 CharlieMurphy wrote:

No one is truly free to do whatever they want ever. There are consequences in one form or another.

On July 10 2009 04:16 LuckyOne wrote:
would be a perfect timing for tibetan and others to riot too

On July 10 2009 04:02 BisuBoi wrote:
So a country transferring resources from one of its regions to another should be considered a crime? Citizens of the dominant ethnicity moving to ethnic areas is wrong and should be punishable by being beaten to death with sticks?

Yes, if white people moved to Brooklyn, the blacks should come out, say "they're trying to dilute our culture" and start mass murdering James and Susan right? What part of "the Tibetans and Uighurs are ethnocentric and willing to get violent over it" don't you get?

Han Chauvinism? People from the West tend to think there's something beautiful about Tibetan culture, like it's some kind of pristine wonder and Han Chinese are stamping it out in the name of imperialism. It's not like that. The people don't shower there. They drink butter half the time and the other half they sit around doing subsistence agriculture. In any modern Western country, they would consider these citizens impoverished and would be going in there 24/7 with social programs and welfare agents trying to get these people to "civilize." As if "modern society" was a Han invention. What a crock of shit.

The thing that really gets on my nerves is how these Western kids run in here and have all these lofty ideals, when they've lived their entire lives on the profits of rape and plunder. Sure is convenient to start declaring war is wrong and nothing should be solved through violence AFTER they raped and conquered the world and set themselves up as the rulers of it all. The ones in power always want to maintain the status quo. God forbid another nation try to pull the same shit they did. It'd be terrible if China added to its territorial possessions but N. Ireland? Oh... that's another issue. US bases all over the world? "They're there for the world's safety." Pffffft.

On July 10 2009 03:21 CharlieMurphy wrote:

No one is truly free to do whatever they want ever. There are consequences in one form or another.

On July 10 2009 06:41 orgolove wrote:
Wow... I never knew the extent of rabid Chinese nationalism rampant among TL's forums.

On July 10 2009 03:49 Jayson X wrote:
Han-chauvinism is to the rest of us like a great wall

On July 10 2009 04:02 BisuBoi wrote:
The thing that really gets on my nerves is how these Western kids run in here and have all these lofty ideals, when they've lived their entire lives on the profits of rape and plunder. Sure is convenient to start declaring war is wrong and nothing should be solved through violence AFTER they raped and conquered the world and set themselves up as the rulers of it all.

On July 10 2009 21:45 BisuBoi wrote:
If you're not one of those kids running in here, preaching from their moral high horses, and condemning a foreign government for how they run their country, then my comment was not directed at you. If my comment was not directed at you, why are you getting offended?

And you seem to have a knack for skewing other's comments. It's plain as day that on one hand, I'm talking about citizens in Western countries having greater privileges in their life afforded to them by the actions of their ancestors. On the other hand, when I talk about "setting themselves up as rulers of it all" I am talking about America as a nation.

Even so, I find it rather facetious for you to claim that you weren't responsible for any of this, blah blah, I shouldn't be held accountable. So, Madoff's son shouldn't get his assets taken away, because it's not his fault his dad did all this heinous stuff, he should still be able to live his life and profit off the spoils right? By the mere fact that you have lived and enjoyed the prosperity of America, you are a beneficiary of the colonial system. Someone who is a beneficiary of the colonial system has less right to speak out against perceived colonial wrongs perpetrated by other countries.

In a nutshell, I'm saying if you're American and want to complain about China holding territory that isn't "traditionally" theirs, you are like the pot calling the kettle black. Yes, I hear white kids whine ALL the time about how it's not their fault, that they don't benefit, they're not the ones calling the shots. But you know what, it's BS. Separate the general population from the gov't? Yes, I would do that in a Communist country.

Those same "freedoms" that Americans are so apt to screech on and on about are the same freedoms that make you responsible for the actions of your government. The citizens of a democracy are the ones who create their government. That is the rhetoric of democracy, no? And their gov'ts aims are wholly to benefit their citizens. How are you going to now claim that the interests of gov't and citizen are divorced and that the citizens of a self-determinant governing system should be exonerated of any responsibility to said gov't? Does this not sound like a load of bull to you? You can't have it both ways, buddy.

Nobody is saying you should pay restitution for slavery, live a life of abject poverty to make up for the pillaging of your ancestors, or give up the Americas and return to England. That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that a lot of these kids who want to condemn OTHERS, should maybe stop being so damn judgmental and realize that what they condemn are the same actions that gave them their life of prosperity that they STILL enjoy to this very day. It's really a simple concept.

It's like complaining about other people selling drugs, when your father is a drug dealer and you drive around in a sports car all day paid for with his drug dealing. It's hypocrisy to the nth degree and anyone who's studied the history knows this.

Now if you DO renounce all claims to possessions and luxuries that were afforded to you by the colonial era, if you go to a society where your white skin does not afford you privileges, if you don't use your background to advantage yourself in some way, I would say that you are morally righteous enough to start criticizing others. And the counterargument is of course, well Chinese people have privileges too etc etc. And yes, they do. And many of those privileges were afforded by imperialist actions as well. The DIFFERENCE here is that you rarely see Chinese kids running around condemning the West for their actions and calling them morally reprehensible on a societal level and preaching about how much better their country does things than the West.

That's the difference. Most of the CHinese on here show humility and admit to mistakes and say so openly. Most of what I've seen in the thread are things like "we KNOW our gov't lies to us. We know shit is bad. We're trying to work on it."

Most (definitely not all. There are some great and well-thought out opinions as well). Western voices here have been "Chinese are disgusting." "Why are they such murderous pigs?" "What they're doing is WRONG!" There is a completely different attitude towards everything. There is an obvious superiority complex and this sentiment that they come from a higher moral standing and have a right to judge and condemn others. That is the difference. Chinese aren't trying to condemn anyone, they're just trying to improve their own lives. Americans somehow feel the need to interject their opinions into every issue and judge others. I'm sure Americans would feel just as offended if a bunch of Chinese people came in after the Don King incident and said shit like OMG USA ARE RACIST PIGS!! Horrible people, Horrible gov't!! And even then the context is not nearly the same because it's not coming in after 200 some years of rape and pillage and atrocities committed by Chinese people.

On July 10 2009 21:45 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:
So...the history of the world is the history of violece. The point remains that the creation of the United States, while filled with acts of violence, was the biggest step in the past 1000 years toward a moral world.

On July 10 2009 21:51 Boblion wrote:
I suggest you to take an history book about industrial revolutions, another about the political history of modern Europe and to read the list of Nobel prize laureates if you want to understand why most of the "Western kids enjoy a cool life" ( which is definitly not true for of them btw )
Saying that the main factor was colonization is laughable.

On July 10 2009 22:05 BisuBoi wrote:
No, the point where your argument utterly fails is that Chinese kids aren't running in here and claiming they're holier than thou. They know where their privilege comes from and it's humbling to them rather than giving them a reason to evangelize about how great they are and what paragons of moral virtue they are and how the rest of the world should emulate them. Do you see that happening in this thread? When you can spot it and make a strong case for it occurring, that's when you can flip the script and start claiming you can say the same.

On July 10 2009 22:05 BisuBoi wrote:
It's pretty hilarious that you're trying to cite all this when your first example is already dead wrong. Last I checked, Marx wasn't Chinese. Also, last I checked, Communist revolutions occurred when the lower classes are put into a state of abject poverty and use force of arms as a last resort to fix their woes.

On July 10 2009 22:05 BisuBoi wrote:
Also, one of the greatest priorities of Red China was an expulsion of foreign powers. Explain how exactly the Communist movement in China would have had an atmosphere to blossom in without the advent of European powers invading China?

On July 10 2009 22:05 BisuBoi wrote:
Then your little tidbit about German GDP is supposed to somehow prove me wrong. But I'm failing to understand your ineffable logic here. Smaller and less durable colonial empire? Germany profited immensely on the boom in economic trade created by all the activity of the colonial era. A large part of their growth also came from the fact that they had a lot of economic room to grow.

On July 10 2009 22:05 BisuBoi wrote:
When you take any bunch of fragmented and warring states, unify them, and then start standardizing their economies, you're going to see a hell of a lot of growth! To take one country's statistics, completely isolate them from their historical context, and then try to use the numbers to disprove colonial privilege as a theory is "laughable."

On July 10 2009 04:02 BisuBoi wrote:
The thing that really gets on my nerves is how these Western kids run in here and have all these lofty ideals, when they've lived their entire lives on the profits of rape and plunder.

On July 10 2009 22:05 BisuBoi wrote:
Sorry dude, you're going to have to come with something a lot stronger than that. In fact, your approach to this issue is quite similar to the one taken by those other Western kids who take issues, ignore the context, boil them down to simple dynamics, and try to tout them as proof.

I suggest you take your history books and reread them. Also, try to wrap your head around what drives scientific innovation and progress. I'll give you a hint, it starts with an E. I'm not even going to wade into the many Chinese invented technologies that were pivotal in the start of the Industrial Revolution. To do so would be too easy.

On July 10 2009 22:29 Skeetzsche wrote:

I don't see what you mean by this. You can't look at the industrial revolution alone and somehow claim that that was the reason standard of living became high in the European countries without putting it into a social context and looking at the factors that made it possible. The entire course up to the Industrial Revolution was rather brutal: many people in the industrial countries themselves needed to be deprived of their livelihood, basically pauperized, in order to create a workforce suitable for industrial production; much of the capital that made investment into industrial production possible in the first place was derived from plunder of the New World, the slave trade, etc., among other factors.

On July 10 2009 21:48 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:



I bet you are really fun at parties.

And so what if I have a superiority complex? What is wrong with hypocrisy? Fuck you you fucking moralist -- I'll be hypocritical if I want to.

On July 10 2009 23:23 Alizee- wrote:
Oh and I'm gonna add one more bit, to the people bitching about how you have to move to other countries to find work because things are so rough. There's one thing I'll say about America is instead of moving all over the world to find work, we solve the problems inside our own country, not leech off other countries because we don't have the resolve to fix our own shit. So there you go Chinese nationalism in this thread meet American nationalism and we have the fatter cocks on the block, gg.

On July 10 2009 23:23 Alizee- wrote:
Oh and I'm gonna add one more bit, to the people bitching about how you have to move to other countries to find work because things are so rough. There's one thing I'll say about America is instead of moving all over the world to find work, we solve the problems inside our own country, not leech off other countries because we don't have the resolve to fix our own shit. So there you go Chinese nationalism in this thread meet American nationalism and we have the fatter cocks on the block, gg.

On July 10 2009 23:33 BisuBoi wrote:
If you know that the roof you live under was built with drug and blood money, do you think it is morally righteous for you to continue living there while condemning the sale of drugs? Or would it not be more righteous and moral of you to MOVE OUT of that home and THEN seek to condemn the sale of drugs? Because that is the moral dilemma Americans face when they cry outrage at the imperialist actions of others. And I find it ludicrous to say something like "well, I was born here. It wasn't my choice." Yes, it wasn't your choice, but it is your choice to REMAIN there. And by remaining there you become an accomplice to the crime. Just as someone who sees a crime occurring, does nothing to stop it while having full knowledge that it is a crime, could be considered an accomplice in a court of law.

On the white skin thing, I really hate to do it because it's a dick move and I feel resentful when others pull this card on me, but the fact remains that you don't know what you're missing out on until it's not there. You are blind to the many advantages you have due to your skin color because you've never lived with the absence of it! Live in the shoes of a black man in American society for 20 years and I guarantee you would be singing a different tune about what benefits your skin color can bring you. The funny thing is most of the white people who complain about oppression of the Uighurs are often the same ones who cry about how unfair it is that others talk about white privilege because minorities have all the benefits. In China, the Uighurs have all the extra benefits on paper too. Do you think it really adds up to an actual advantage in practice?

On July 10 2009 21:48 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:



I bet you are really fun at parties.

And so what if I have a superiority complex? What is wrong with hypocrisy? Fuck you you fucking moralist -- I'll be hypocritical if I want to.

On July 09 2009 23:29 MK wrote:

I ain't saying they don't understand. I'm saying people from the outside understand better, or indeed, could understand better.

Actually, from the inside, I ain't even sure it's "understand" but maybe more like "aware". Difficult to think without freedom so hard to understand

I don't like it when people dismiss entire arguments by saying lol you haven't lived here your argument is invalid. It's probably a logical fallacy of some sort. Instead of doing that, can we please address individual points and refute them? If you're so versed in the culture it should be easy.

Somehow these China topics also bring up how evil the west is. It makes no sense; no one is talking about America or Europe. This topic is for discussing China; you guys are deflecting criticism by saying "lol you're worse." It's not like we only criticize China. Since you live in China and may not know this, we bash our governments a lot maybe even more than China.

The US police are routinely armed with rubber bullets and have no problem using them.

Rofl, they were using rubber bullets all through Hurricane Katrina. In fact, US military troops were ordered to fire live rounds at people who were looting the wreckage for food and water!

"They have M16s and are locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill and I expect they will," Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco said. Congressman Bill Jefferson (D-LA) told ABC News: "There was shooting going on. There was sniping going on. Over the first week of September, law and order were gradually restored to the city."

Don't make it sound like this is some barbaric practice no longer done in the USA. Kids in the US get tasered for asking politicians questions.

You think LAPD would be bringing out the water cannons? Get real.

Btw your knowledge of US history is fucking abysmal. Last mass ethnic rioting was the "cival" rights movement? Civil rights movement was 1950's - 60's. The last mass ethnic rioting were the 1992 LA race riots. OOPS! You messed up!

On July 12 2009 15:58 sk` wrote:
Reference an article on large scale rounds being fired into crowds post-Katrina and stop blabbering bullshit. His was a hallow threat, because again, the number of shots fired according to all accounts, from that point, where limited to isolated cops going over the line who have almost all been fired of tried for their acts since.

So... you're still using the word "kids" for tazer incidents. Is this something the Chinese media tells you about life in the States? I agree with you about police brutality 100% and I do find it sickening, though I find it more sickening that Americans have stopped rising up to defend out rights - but that's another topic. However, I disagree with your spreading false information claiming we have children tazered left and right.

I'm going to just not believe you're from the States given the level of mis-information and out-right lies your propagating. Also, if I was racist... well, let's just bring up the term for fun shall we?
rac·ism
Pronunciation:
\ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
Function:
noun
Date:
1933
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
So, have I said anything that would indicate I believe one race is better than another? I'm very certain I haven't.

Again, you're not making a very strong case for being from the States. Your account of modern events couldn't be more laced with propaganda and your general understanding of American history would indicate you didn't grow up in the states.

Again, another clue that leads me to believe you're not really from the states. I mean, if someone says "mass" in this case we usually mean a region and not a single city. Much like what you have going on in China right now.

My goal is not education in the slightest and I've actually posted a handful of times in this thread at most. Don't confuse me with someone else. Honestly, I thought I would stay out of this one entirely, as I really don't have a strong opinion on it one way or the other, but the crap you spew made me want to jump it. Clearly, I got baited.

I'm also going to have to close myself as I did in the Japan thread... you seem to just be a cog in a propaganda machine so there's next to no point in continuing here. It's been interesting... I guess an eye opener as I had falsely assumed the average Chinese person was similar to the average American, i.e. not a mirror or our government. You however, have shown me, at least in your case, mirrors certainly exist.

On July 12 2009 13:30 BisuBoi wrote:

The funniest part of it is that I highly doubt Velr has much knowledge of Chinese culture or history at all, yet wants to make a snarky little comment about how he's sure it's just an excuse for such obviously heinous tyranny and that there could never be an excuse for what the Chinese do. Nor do I think Boblion has ever even opened a Chinese newspaper, or even is literate in Mandarin Chinese. Yet he wants to make a comment about the entire Chinese journalistic world? It's a sad day when someone thinks he knows something and has zero primary sources or experiences to back up his views. Yet wants to come up with theories about China and their censorship. It's strongly implied in his post that Chinese are so ignorant that they can't be trusted to comment on anything, unlike the West. All 3 of these comments are written with a direct comparison between Eastern and Western cultures. So telling me that it isn't about people from the West claiming they're better is just a boldfaced lie.

On July 13 2009 00:25 Boblion wrote:
Why are they blocking youtube, twitter, CNN or the BBC so ?
Insecure much ?
Freedom of expression maybe ?

Actually i'm not even critisizing what is happening with the riots. You can't really blame the police when ethnic riots happen. But the problem is the lack of non biased informations. The government says that most of the people who died were Hans but at the same time he is blocking informations eh ...

On July 13 2009 00:59 ghrur wrote:
It stated that those who surrendered would be exempt from punishment.

On July 12 2009 03:42 Stripe wrote:
Also according to Jared Diamond in "Guns Germs and Steel," no colonial power earned a net profit from colonization not even the British Raj in India since it cost the nation way more to garisson their troops there. The may economic growth of the modern era was capitalism and competition not colonialism. That's responsible for all the improvements in life and new technology not stealing resources from other countries.

On July 12 2009 03:42 Stripe wrote:
I don't like it when people dismiss entire arguments by saying lol you haven't lived here your argument is invalid. It's probably a logical fallacy of some sort. Instead of doing that, can we please address individual points and refute them? If you're so versed in the culture it should be easy.

Somehow these China topics also bring up how evil the west is. It makes no sense; no one is talking about America or Europe. This topic is for discussing China; you guys are deflecting criticism by saying "lol you're worse." It's not like we only criticize China. Since you live in China and may not know this, we bash our governments a lot maybe even more than China.

Also according to Jared Diamond in "Guns Germs and Steel," no colonial power earned a net profit from colonization not even the British Raj in India since it cost the nation way more to garisson their troops there. The may economic growth of the modern era was capitalism and competition not colonialism. That's responsible for all the improvements in life and new technology not stealing resources from other countries.

On July 13 2009 01:57 BisuBoi wrote:
Most civil unrest is due to bad PR management on the gov'ts part. Anyone who knows how shit goes knows that the average citizen in any country has very little capacity to change how the system works. The only time the average citizen can do anything is when the gov't has collapsed and can no longer exert control. I think it's really disgusting that morons like Babblion are trying to drop snide remarks like "insecure much?" If you knew a damn thing about China's history, you would know that is exactly the problem! They're a relatively NEW country that's emerged from almost 2 centuries of civil war and foreign invasion! YES they're insecure!

If you had to govern 1.4 billion people with a history of civil unrest and build a first-class economy from scratch and the world's only superpower is actively trying to destabilize your political system, would you be glowing with confidence? The lack of understanding is exactly why I take issue with so many of the criticisms. If there was actually a high degree of dissent among the population, you think the People's Party could really hold on to control?

On July 10 2009 12:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:


icwudt.

The feeling that regions like Xinjian and Tibet are "ungrateful" isn't really hard to understand. China views those areas as a rightful part of its territory, and has invested a lot of time and resources into the regions in an attempt to improve the conditions and try to make the locals feel the same way. When these generally good-intentioned attempts are met with accusations of destroying culture/heritage, it's only natural that some of the Chinese feel offended.

On July 09 2009 18:59 haduken wrote:


I'm sorry evan. You are dead wrong on China being in control. The vast inland regions are effectively a big fucking ghetto. Bright kids leave for the big coastal cities, money and minerals gets ship off to the richer states.

It's a ridiculous and untolerable situation due to government's changing policy shifts. The government periodically change their economic development focus and if your region is leftout, good luck because you are pretty much fucked for the next decade or two.

On July 13 2009 04:23 Jayson X wrote:


Lack of understanding. Why does it never work both ways? While you criticize everyone else from not understanding you, how are we to blame? Wasn't it your government that expels journalists? Wasn't it your government that cuts internet and telephone connections of whole areas? You're essentially asking to cut the government some slack, because well it's a big country, lots of people and you don't quite know how things are going down the proper way, really??

On July 13 2009 04:23 Jayson X wrote:


Lack of understanding. Why does it never work both ways? While you criticize everyone else from not understanding you, how are we to blame? Wasn't it your government that expels journalists? Wasn't it your government that cuts internet and telephone connections of whole areas? You're essentially asking to cut the government some slack, because well it's a big country, lots of people and you don't quite know how things are going down the proper way, really??

You can't blame water for boiling in a pot when you put on the heat.



No! I cannot accept such a viewpoint. And neither could you if we switched positions.
There is no desire to improve conditions for the locals, there is only assimilation to a system that neither speaks your language nor accepts your cultural and religious freedom. If it shouldn't be hard to understand why do we have all these problems in the first place?

You tell me, how is this going to end? The government dealt with this kind of situation before and the same reaction pattern can be seen. What is being done to prevent these situations from happening again? Long term! Explain it to me, to us, so we can understand and possibly share your viewpoint.

On July 13 2009 01:24 KissBlade wrote:
@ Bobolion I'll explain that. As I said before, China has always believed that a mix between Legalism and Confucian principles are the proper way to guide a country. Now the two DO clash against each other very very often, however one thing both share is that government stability is the most important thing to guide a nation. The blocking of youtube, twitter, etc is stupid, a lot of Chinese feel the same way. (CNN/BBC is probably blocked due to the bias they themselves show on this matter) It does show a sense of insecurity and obviously unbiased sources of information IS hard to find. But you can hardly say that such things doesn't hold true for both sides.

On July 13 2009 02:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
There's no "unbiased" sources of information I hope you eventually realize that Boblion.

On July 13 2009 02:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Censorship is an act rooted in Chinese conservative ideology. We have an idiom called "家丑不可以外扬“ which means roughly; the ugly side of the personal should not be seen. Chinese censorship is an act embedded in a complex cultural context which people who do not have knowledge and experience of that culture will misinterpret. Boblion in ethnography there is a concept called "naive realism" that refers to people who believe everyone views the world in a similar manner as them.

On July 13 2009 02:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
For the riots, what would China accomplish if they did not exercise control over information in this case?

On July 13 2009 02:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Do you think tensions between the Muslims and the Han would ease?

On July 13 2009 02:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
What do you think the backlash would cause?

On July 13 2009 02:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
More importantly what's your reasoning for not controlling the spread of information about the riots? That it's good and liberal ideology is superior?

On July 13 2009 02:46 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Boblion, why do you want to argue so badly about something you have no clue about.

On July 13 2009 02:46 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I don't understand where this urge to spew retarded shit comes from.

On July 13 2009 02:46 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I've never felt the desire to like, go to a Jewish forum to argue about their religious beliefs then get mad because they tell me I'm saying stupid stuff. Seriously WHY?

On July 13 2009 02:46 zulu_nation8 wrote:
There's a lot to be criticized about Chinese policy, the Chinese media, censorship, etc. But you don't even know how the shit you're criticizing works.

On July 13 2009 02:46 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Why do you post in this thread, Boblion.

On July 13 2009 02:46 zulu_nation8 wrote:
You also mentioned that China threads are usually the worst shitfests on TL.
You single-handedly turned this thread into people educating you about how China really works yet you consistently deny that you have no knowledge of the subject at hand.

On July 13 2009 05:40 BisuBoi wrote:
I totally agree with you but that's the reality of the human condition. Scarcity breeds this kind of behavior. And see, the thing is, I would have no problem with people decrying how all governments do this. It's the position that "wow, this is sick. If they had democracy/freedom/Western values, this would never occur," that really pisses me off.

On July 10 2009 21:45 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:
So...the history of the world is the history of violece. The point remains that the creation of the United States, while filled with acts of violence, was the biggest step in the past 1000 years toward a moral world.

On July 13 2009 17:46 Jayson X wrote:
Bla, noone's going that way Bisuboi. You're like an old tape playing the same tunes over and over again in this thread, pointing at people and telling them they are dead wrong all togheter. Expecting everyone to understand without any attemp to help them understand leading me to believe that you simply think it is good and right and noone outside should put their nose in it.

Our standpoints are fundamentaly different in that you expect them to ACCEPT that it is how it is now and to play along. Yes if the black man just played his position in africa white people could have it so much easier. Nomatter what you do and what benefits you hand out, it still comes from a foreign opressor (yes i know what your standpoint is here, spare me the distorted history).

But as it is with everything, and i assume your goverment read history books, time is on your side and future generations either wont exist or simply wont remember / be teached about their grand-granddads.

On July 13 2009 18:46 BisuBoi wrote:
If I could speak nonsense, I'd respond to you. But at this point, I can't because what you wrote is definitely not English. Don't bother posting if it's going to be a lazy mess that basically says you disagree with me, then throw in a generic example about blacks in Africa (which has nothing to do with this topic). I've given a fair bit of reasoning for my opinion. I think it's pretty ridiculous at this point that you're still complaining I'm not helping you understand. Willful ignorance can't be cured by others, dude.

And I'm not sure what you mean by "played his position" either. Are you talking about basketball? I think Dikembe Mutumbo's retired already. Also, I'd love to see you point out a single regime in Africa that is currently being run by white people. Sorry, your post was truly fail.

A reporter with Hong Kong's RTHK radio said two police officers were shot and three Muslim Uighurs were killed near the city's White Mosque.

On July 13 2009 17:42 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:


You are a big baby.

You argue that hypocrisy is bad. I want to know why.

Come on sissy-boy, tell me why.

On July 13 2009 19:55 Jayson X wrote:


I don't know what pisses me off more about you, the huge stick up your ass or the national flag attached to it.

One day your way of life is going to bite you right in the ass. IN YOUR ASS I TELL YOU!

On July 14 2009 10:44 KissBlade wrote:


I don't know why I found this quote so funny =\

On July 14 2009 12:27 BisuBoi wrote:
I don't understand the concept of inalienable rights because there is nothing inalienable about them. It's not like they're a theory of physics. Rights are a political ideal created by individuals and as such have no basis in reality. It is what it is: a human construct that exists only when humans actively will it into existence.

On July 14 2009 12:35 sith wrote:


While inalienable rights are indeed created by people for people, the idea behind them is that now that we have established their existence, they cannot be taken away by any power, government or individual alike.

On July 14 2009 16:04 Krikkitone wrote:
The fact that the Uighurs is aggressors is not the larger issue. The larger issue is that

1) the Chinese government is structured in such a way that the Uighurs are more likely to approach their problems this way (as they have no significant control over the government over them)

2) the Chinese government is structured in such a way that its response cannot be significantly examined or controlled by the rest of Chinese people (those who are not in government, and even some of those in government).

On July 14 2009 16:04 Krikkitone wrote:
The fact that the Uighurs is aggressors is not the larger issue. The larger issue is that

1) the Chinese government is structured in such a way that the Uighurs are more likely to approach their problems this way (as they have no significant control over the government over them)

2) the Chinese government is structured in such a way that its response cannot be significantly examined or controlled by the rest of Chinese people (those who are not in government, and even some of those in government).

On July 15 2009 00:02 KissBlade wrote:



That makes no sense. That's like saying terrorism is ok because the terrorists don't have the current political power of the US. As haduken has mentioned in this thread before, Uighurs may have justifiable grievances but their current actions aren't the solution.

On July 15 2009 02:55 Krikkitone wrote:



Not saying that it is OK, saying that is is expected due to the situation. Violent slave revolts aren't OK, but they should be expected, especially by poorly treated slaves.

If groups that conducted terrorism against the US were actually made up of US citizens, then they Would be given(already have) political power. (because their members could vote) This would give them less of a reason to conduct terrorism.

If you are implying the solution for middle eastern based terrorism is to annex the entire middle east and add another 10-20 states and a few hundred million new citizens. Well that might work if the US were less centralized than it is now. As it is, they would feel like they had lost even more political autonomy.

As for whether or not their current actions are the solution.... well they are disorganized, but violent reistance of governments has been effective in the past (as has nonviolent resistance). Whether or not the action is effective isn't a justification, but it is an explanation.

I am not saying their actions are moral, but they might be the only (even if minimally) effective action. On the other hand, if China's government offered moral, legal, effective methods to get their needs addressed, then this would probably be less likely to happen.

The other, second and even Bigger issue is that the remainder of the non-Uighur Chinese citizens cannot determine if this is the proper response because they don't have access to the information needed. Of course Most of those people also can't affect the government that much, so it doesn't matter. However, the method that the Chinese government is actually using to respond may or may not be the best, but because the information is limited that cannot be assessed. Even members of the Chinese government itself may withold information from other members, because they have the means to control the information, and that gives them power/ability to hide poor judgement.

On July 15 2009 02:55 Krikkitone wrote:
The other, second and even Bigger issue is that the remainder of the non-Uighur Chinese citizens cannot determine if this is the proper response because they don't have access to the information needed. Of course Most of those people also can't affect the government that much, so it doesn't matter. However, the method that the Chinese government is actually using to respond may or may not be the best, but because the information is limited that cannot be assessed. Even members of the Chinese government itself may withold information from other members, because they have the means to control the information, and that gives them power/ability to hide poor judgement.