Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Your Rights Online

China Shuts Down 17,000 Internet Bars 599

Astin writes: "According to this article, Chinese authorities have shut down more than 17,000 Internet bars for failing to block Web sites considered subversive or pornographic. Out of the 94,000 Internet bars in China, 17,488 have been shut down and another 28,000 were ordered to install monitoring software soon. Of the 27 million Internet users in China, about 4.5 million rely on these bars. Foreign news organizations fall under the category of 'subversive'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Shuts Down 17,000 Internet Bars

Comments Filter:
  • Help! (Score:0, Insightful)

    by BankofAmerica_ATM ( 537813 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:12PM (#2596509) Homepage Journal
    Some drunk came into the stop N Go and Peed on me! I am wet, and I may malfunction. Please help.
  • Re:Well yeah.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by easter1916 ( 452058 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:21PM (#2596574) Homepage
    China is about as marxist as my left nipple. Its politico-economic situation is a weird, bastard stepchild between military-owned capitalism, nationalism, communism and nepotism. Marxism it is not.
  • Normal Students? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Talisman ( 39902 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:21PM (#2596576) Homepage
    From the article:

    "Some youths will submerge themselves in Internet bars for long periods, playing unhealthy games and adversely affecting their development as normal students."

    If porn and video games do not make for normal students, I dare say that there has never been a normal male child, ever. Sex and games occupied most of my time while I was a student.

    And I'm plenty normal. Just ask my psychiatrist.

    Talisman
  • Good timing. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:23PM (#2596589)
    Funny how this happens JUST after Chinas entrance into the WTO, and just after the Chinese government told the world that now that they were in the WTO, they werent going to disregard human rights so much. Funny how the internet bars that service the foreign press in China, get closed down shortly after the largest contigent of foreign press leave China. The investigation is going on since April, but nobody wants to rock the boat until China is in the WTO, and all the press and other foreigners have left. The news will be just swallowed up, the majority of people wont even hear about it, and China gets to say HA HA and you beleived we were going to change you morons.

    This might not seem like a big deal to people, but the people they arrest of online dissent get lumped in as Falun Gong members and can be executed. This isnt that they cant view porn. They cant see whats going on in the world. Is CNN Subversive? It is when the chinese government lies to its citizens every day.

    GOD THE WORLD IS SO CORRUPT it makes me hate it. And everyone tomorow is just going to say business as usual and carry on the same way. When it happens in America, you remember that you all watched it happen, and the opinions you took on China and Saudi Arabias actions.
  • Re:Wow. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HCase ( 533294 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:23PM (#2596590)
    If this happened in America all hell would break loose, but in China, most people probably don't care, if they even notice. Only 27 million of their 1.3 billion citizens access the internet. Thats about 2 percent. Of those 2 percent, only 4.5 million rely on the internet bars. So even if all of them were effected by the lose of these bars(which not all are) only .3 percent of the population that was effected. Unfortunately not enough to throw a coup or have a very effect revolt against an armed government willing to use force.
  • by drenehtsral ( 29789 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:25PM (#2596607) Homepage
    I wouldn't be so quick to say that. Now that the U.S. is "at war" i wouldn't be surprised to see more censorship popping up left and right. Now admittedly, we do have a long way to go before it gets that bad, but i doubt many americans could be bothered to kill (and conversely to die) for their freedom of speech and freedom of asociation, hell many can't even be bothered vote for those freedoms, some can't even be bothered to vote at all.
    During World War II we locked people up for their ethnic background, and during the cold war we persecuted people based for allegedly belonging to subversive political organizations that supported things such as a living wage and racial equality.
    What i'm saying is that we shouldn't be so smug, this sort of thing isn't as far fetched as one might think.
  • Re:Wow. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by yatest5 ( 455123 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:26PM (#2596615) Homepage
    I have to say the idea of people who frequent Internet Cafes in America making 'all hell break loose' or 'throwing a coup' makes me laugh, hard.

    I would put it to you, sir, that if the American government shut down some internet cafes, the majority of Americans would not give a flying fuck. Now, if you were to shut down McDonalds or ban lame-ass sitcoms - that would be another thing...
  • by Auckerman ( 223266 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:29PM (#2596640)
    "Whatever happened to fighting the good fight against communism because it threatened the freedoms we fought so hard to win?"


    Because the people in China need to feed their families and earn an honest living. Because if the USA were to "(fight) the good fight" due to some moral docterine our economy would collapse almost instantly as we alienate Singapore, China, Vietnam, and every other "freedom hating" regime on the planet. Because, when it comes down to it, we have to make the best that we can and help the most people possible.

  • Re:Who cares... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by emdean091876 ( 320115 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:32PM (#2596666)
    That is a very naive comment.

    The last time the people of China "[grew] some balls" was at Tiananmen square. That sure worked out well for them. I think some people forget that not all of us live in a somewhat "free" society.

    I think it's very ignorant to think that the people of China deserve a government that abuses their human rights. I think that it is even more ignorant to think that the people of China do not have any "balls" because they do not try to stand up for themselves more often.

    When you stand up for your rights in China, you are eliminated, plain and simple.

    It's one thing to say that if you were in their situation you'd stand up for your own rights; it's another to actually do it when you are there.
  • by quartz ( 64169 ) <shadowman@mylaptop.com> on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:35PM (#2596686) Homepage
    "Timid majority"? Heh. There were a few thousand students in Tiananmen square. China has a population of 1.2 billion. You do the math.
  • by RandomCoil ( 88441 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:44PM (#2596751)
    "Fighting the good fight" against communism ended when Nixon went to China and began a policy of detente, as well he should have. China is indeed guilty of some horrible human rights violations, as are most countries, but I don't think another protracted cold war will solve much of anything. What I think Bush, or at least his advisors, correctly realize is that a country that is open to two-way trade is a country that is open to the most powerful weapons of democracy: interaction. I would bet that putting a McDonalds in Moscow has done more Russia-US relations than any number of summit meetings.

    I find it somewhat odd that you speak of rabid Christian morality and ideology and then complain that the US policy towards China isn't sufficiently idealistic or moral in it its dealings with China. Which way did you want it?

    RC
  • by Exmet Paff Daxx ( 535601 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:46PM (#2596777) Homepage Journal
    No, it's the Chinese government's way of life. The people don't exactly have a choice.

    The people may not have a choice, but be careful when you say that the Chinese people don't support what the government is doing. There are a billion Chinese people. Telling a Chinese girl that she's "one in a million" is like telling her that there are 1,000 girls that look just like her.

    When half a million students go downtown and shout angry slogans and act up, that's one half of one percent of one percent of their population. That's an insignifigant little piece of dirt. And believe it or not, a good majority of that billion people, the truly "Silent Majority" in China, watched those kids get run over by tanks with the same satisfaction we reserve for watching the Klu Klux Klan get pegged with glass bottles on T.V.

    China is extremely conservative. That's what happens when your survive the Chinese Cultural Revolution [hawaii.edu], when young people rose up, took control, killed all the skilled doctors, lawyers and artisans, and ran loose across the countryside committing mass murder. The Chinese people on the whole have had enough radical change for two lifetimes. They are a product of their history, just like us.

    A lot of Chinese Americans I know roll their eyes when they hear about the "Concert(s) for Tibetan Freedom". Held in stadiums on the very land from which we marched millions of Native Americans across the Trail of Tears to their death, it seems to them to be at best hypocritical and at worst pure vanity on our part to assume that the Chinese government is so very different from our own.

    Be careful throwing stones on behalf of the Chinese. They are a proud and strong culture, they outnumber us, they have seen wars so terrible that our country can only imagine. They have had tiny revolutions that lasted longer than our entire country has been in existence.

    I'm not approving the action; I'm saying you should weigh your opinion and your ignorance together carefully first.
  • by MikeLRoy ( 246462 ) <umroyma0@NoSpaM.cc.umanitoba.ca> on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:50PM (#2596796) Homepage Journal
    This story illustrates a wider problem internationally, that of regimes which quell any sort of human rights and freedoms. US & Allies are currently engaged in a war in persuit of one man, accused of murder. The side affect of this (which is widely publicised in the Canadian press) is that Afghan citizens (especially women) are regaining many fundamental freedoms. However, liberating oppressed people was clearly not the intent of the war.

    If one man is worth starting a war over, then isn't it also worthwhile to fight for people's freedom? Saudi-Arabia, China, Pakistan, and Indonesia are amongst the nations that the west does business with, and yet the oppress billions of people. Why can't we justify war with these countries, or even extreme trade embargoes, if only to ensure their people's freedom? How many barrels of oil or cheap shirts is a woman/man's freedom worth??

    I'm not making an anti-US statement here. Canada, Britain, the EU, and australia, amongst others, are exactly the same.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @01:51PM (#2596811)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Matters of Scale (Score:3, Insightful)

    by JJ ( 29711 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:04PM (#2596889) Homepage Journal
    I agree that it should concern every US citizen when the government plans to impinge on the rights of any US citizen, but my concerns can be allayed at times. Is a little more border control warranted? I think yes. Should student visa holders receive greater scrutiny than at present (currently zero)? Again, I'm okay with that. What China does is attempt to completely silence all contrary viewpoints, especially the free press. I'm much more concrened about that, than anything Ashcroft has dreamt up lately.
  • by supernova87a ( 532540 ) <kepler1@@@hotmail...com> on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:05PM (#2596892)
    I'm an American, and you know, I never fail to be fascinated/frustrated at how vigorously other Americans attack China. Who said that our system is the best? And who are you to criticize another country for providing for its people in the best way they deem possible? It's not like the leaders are in it for the fun of it -- good god, they have to serve 1.2 billion people! Let me see you manage a country that large, by giving people all the same freedoms we enjoy here. We have enough trouble already, with only 1/5 the population... If you think about it, it's like people here have been programmed to hate China just because it's one of the few remaining "Communist" countries around. Do we really need another enemy? Why create one when China doesn't want to be an enemy? Never mind that their increasingly capitalist structure has given far more people over there opportunities than can be said about some of our population here. When you criticize China, are you doing so because you've really thought about the issues, or because that's all the media has told you to do here? Sometimes the freedom of thought is more quashed here than in less-priviliged, knowledge-embracing countries...
  • by Zen Mastuh ( 456254 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:11PM (#2596915)

    It's already here. Perhaps the largest of underreported [censored?] stories of the last decade is the growth of the corporate prison industry in America. The owners of these chains have donated heavily to "tough-on-crime" Republican candidates and in return have been given a limitless--and growing--supply of "criminals", usually people convicted of growing/manufacturing/distributing non-alcoholic drugs.

    Here is how it works: the prisoner performs labor for Microsoft/WalMart/etc... for a low wage, around $1.00/hour. Part of this wage goes to pay the cost of imprisonment. If the prisoner committed a true crime, a portion of the wage goes towards a restitution fund. The remainder can be spent by the prisoner on overpriced soap/toothpaste/deodorant/etc... It's a win-win situation for the owner: the prisoner pays to be a prisoner, and the owner profits from the prisoner's labor.

    The result?

    • A permanent domestic source of slave labor
    • Elimination of controversy surrounding use of third-world slave labor by American corporations
    • Extremely high profitability for the owners
    • Large donations to the campaigns of "tough-on-crime" legislators, which enable them to write additional "tough-on-crime" laws

    Wait 'til they have finished milking the War on (Some) Drugs and start milking the War on Illegal (Open Source) Software.

  • by GypC ( 7592 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:22PM (#2596984) Homepage Journal

    Is the government just as guilty of censorship for not allowing Penthouse magazine on the racks in a public library?

    I suppose so, but most rational people would consider that a reasonable and desirable amount of censorship. After all, we don't want parents forbidding their children to go to the library because they have porn on the shelves.

    As long as they are censoring "obscene" material and not "subversive content" then there is no real ethical problem (as long as we can agree on the definition of obscenity, but that's another kettle of fish.)

    It's just too bad that censorware doesn't really work.

  • Re:IT is. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bigox ( 158657 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:22PM (#2596985)
    ...but these people chose this form of government...

    No, it is a clear case of a minority dictating to the majority. The nationalists just got their asses kicked. That's all.

    Most in China will secretly tell you that their government sucks, but they are too afraid to do anything about it.
  • Futility (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:30PM (#2597041)
    Anyone know the feasability of satellite internet access in china? --- Sounds like there should be a hell of a market for it over there....

    no wires to cut, no way to filter it.
  • by Zen Mastuh ( 456254 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:35PM (#2597081)

    Don't be fooled by the same logic that you believe the parent poster is fooled by. True, many good things have come from our Capitalist society. However, your understanding of the system is not based on any facts. With the exception of Gates, Bezos, Perot, and a handful of others, people who "work hard, take risks, and take responsibility usually" don't make it to the top. These people are called employees. Most heads of corporation reek of old money. Their friends and families sit in Government and on the boards of PACs. Now that our government is bailing out the airline industry for its lousy (and deadly) business practices, the notion that corporate owners take risks is obsolete. The exception is small businesses.

    Statements like "hippy commune" show your inability to construct a factual argument. What good does "finding another job" do when the game is already rigged by the winners?

    There are an infinite number of economic systems waiting to be explored.

  • Re:IT is. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by monkeydo ( 173558 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @02:54PM (#2597190) Homepage
    No, it is a clear case of a minority dictating to the majority.

    And they have the right to be OK with that.

    Most in China will secretly tell you that their government sucks, but they are too afraid to do anything about it.

    Also their choice. It isn't up to you or me or the UN to force a revolution against a government _we_ don't like. We can use political pressure and such to _urge_ them in a particular direction, but except for violations of "internationl law" and certain humanitarian issues we have no right to tell them how to run their country.

    There is no inalienable right to live in a democracy.

  • by prisoner-of-enigma ( 535770 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @03:34PM (#2597387) Homepage
    Hear hear! You have espoused an idea that I thought was long past anyone grasping: power is not taken from the people, it is given by the people to the government.

    Even the most totalitarian regime in history was outnumbered by the citizens of said regime. If a revolt happened on a national scale, any government could be toppled, even the U.S. All that's needed is citizens with courage -- Ghandi proved that to the mightiest empire in modern times (Britain), and he never fired a shot. It is not easy, it is hard. People die. But what is better? Living in oppression or fighting and perhaps dying for freedom? I would rather fight and take my chances than huddle at the government's whim. It's a pity that more people don't realize where power comes from, but then again they are educated from day one by government institutions that "the system" is unfightable.
  • by prisoner-of-enigma ( 535770 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @04:24PM (#2597696) Homepage
    If anarchy is so good, how come in the past 10,000 years of history it has never lasted nor succeeded? I'll tell you why: because a fractious society of individuals cannot stand against a more organized, united force of similar numbers. It is true, and cannot be denied.

    Anarchy isn't the answer any more than Despotism is. Extreme forms of government DO NOT WORK, and it is childish to think they will just because you want it to be so. True longevity is derived from balance. Anarchy means no laws: if I can find a way to kill you, it's perfectly alright to do so, and vice versa. If I want to rape your wife and get away with it, I face no penalty if you cannot bring force to bear on me. Ditto for stealing your stuff. Despotism means no freedom: you live at the sufferance of the government, and you can be made to disappear without consequence if the government decides they don't like you anymore.

    To date, the best possible form of government devised by man is the Representative Democracy. It is not perfect, and perfection is not possible anymore than it is possible to calculate infinity, but it has preserved more freedom longer than any other form of government in history. In the end, it will prevail regardless of national affiliate, because it is the only thing that balances personal freedoms with responsiblity for actions.
  • Re:Fear the Net (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Borealis ( 84417 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @05:36PM (#2598072) Homepage
    I don't seriously think most people are complaining that the USA is a *bad* place to live, merely that it is not necessarily on a path to being better.

    Just because you're an american doesn't mean you can't complain about freedoms and privacy being taken from you. On the contrary, I think it's your duty to stand up for your rights.

    Nations must balance the rights of the people vs. the need to prevent bad people from causing mayhem. The fact that many people believe the government is neglecting the rights of the people in an (arguably misguided an ineffectual) effort to prevent crime is probably an indication that the scales have tipped too far in one direction.

    America is a fine nation. I can't honestly rate it vs. other nations having lived here most of my life (the remainder being spent in Canada, which is almost identical). I believe that it is quite possibly one of the best places to live, but that does not prevent me from finding the actions of some of our "leadership" somewhat less than optimal.
  • by markmoss ( 301064 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @05:43PM (#2598115)
    (5) Making falsehoods ...
    (7) ... or distorting the truth to slander people
    8) Injuring the reputation of state organs;

    In other words, TELLING THE TRUTH is also illegal when it injures the reputation of gov't agencies. For instance, mentioning that the reason the elementary school exploded was that they had the kiddies making fireworks to be sold at a profit (true story, AFAIK)...
  • Re:IT is. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ichimunki ( 194887 ) on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @05:53PM (#2598161)
    I think this is the first time I've ever seen moral relativism used to defend obvious totalitarian regimes. Of course the Chinese all love their lives, and their country rocks! So tell me, how many people leave the "free" world to move to China, compared to how many people leave China to live in Europe or the US?

    And yes, I agree with the other poster, we need a basic human rights charter and democratically elected governments in every nation on earth. In fact, I'd like to see a constitutional style global government evolve out of the UN-- again, where we get direct votes on our representatives and executive branch leaders.

    Communism is more of an economic scheme than a political organization (and no more pure in China than the US has a true free market). You could easily have elected leaders operate state-owned, nationalized "businesses". In fact, that's not so different from the way capitalism works, what with its shareholders and stuff. It's just that under democratic communism, being born gives you a full share in the national business and a full vote, whereas under democratic capitalism, you get a full vote, but some people inherit a whole lot of shares from their parents.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 21, 2001 @11:07PM (#2599167)
    As someone who has lived in Shanghai for over 6 years, and has run an Internet Cafe here, I'd like to say you're all talking complete sh*t.

    The reason why the cafes were closed is because 99% of the people inside are not on the internet, but playing halflife/ c&c/ starcraft for 10 - 15 hours a day.
    Fact: Kids are skipping school to play games.
    Fact: Parents want the government to do something.

    The government licences internet cafes - mainly to stop truancy. People really don't give a shit about [insert your favorite english language news site here]. Its in a foreign language.

    Not everyone speaks or reads english. Stop and think about that for a while.

    There are plenty of Chinese language sites with news, from HK, Taiwan, and the Mainland that run exactly the same stories, in the local language. Its the US'ians that don't get it, not the Chinese.

    Lawrence.

    http://www.shanghaiguide.com

Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Working...