Chinese Government Sued Over Dog Height Censorship

Googling Yourself writes "More than 30,000 censors are employed in China to monitor the Internet, so it was no surprise when censors deleted a posting by Chen Yuhua protesting Beijing municipal government's regulations barring any dog over 14 inches high and restricting each family to only one dog. The surprise (reports the Washington Post) was when Chen studied China's civil code and marched into court with a lawsuit, only the second time that a Chinese citizen has gone to court over party censorship. 'I was very careful to follow the correct procedure,' Chen said in an interview, while pointing at the official legal manual on his dining room table. On December 14 Chen was told by clerks that the district court, after referring to higher-level judges for advice, had decided to reject the case. The next step, Chen said, is an appeal to the Supreme Court."

How sweet.

[snarfies]

Chen must love his dog very much. Because my guess is that he's probably going to lose his life over this. Oh, maybe they won't find a way to put him in prison. Not as such. But I'm sure this old fellow is going to have, say, problems collecting his pension. Lost your paperwork, they'll say, so sorry - come back in six months and maybe we'll find it then.

Re:Heightism

[MightyYar]

In all seriousness, as a New York City resident, I would like to ask:

Why is it okay for a dog to piss on the sidewalk, but an arrestable offense when a human does the same? Seriously. No one has ever provided a good answer to this. Urine is sterile, and dog piss smells just as bad as human piss (asparagus aside).

I won't even get into the poop.

Re:Heightism

[DeeQ]

Indecent exspouser. Also on your logic you are smart enough to get hit by a car so go ahead chase that car.

Re:Heightism

[ookabooka]

Because dogs and humans are different.

No, seriously, I don't think it's the urine that's a problem. For instance, if I were to take 100mL of human urine in a sealed container outside and dump it, would there be a different set of laws broken than if it were 100mL of dog urine I was dumping? Essentially I believe it is the act of urination that is an arrestable offense, not the environmental contamination caused by the urine. The reason for that is it's definitely a social norm that one goes to the bathroom, well, in the bathroom, preferably in a toilet. Expecting all dogs to adhere to the same standards is unrealistic, and the law reflects that.
I can't believe I spent time thinking about this. . .

Re:How sweet.

[LWATCDR]

Probably not.
This case really isn't a threat to the power of the government.
By letting this go to court they Chinese can say "Look we have the freedom to criticize our government and we have due process."
Why do you think we are hearing about it?

China gets better - I draw conclusions

[Gorimek]

It's going slow, but China is clearly getting more civilized in terms of human rights and rule of law etc.

I think it's not so much because the rulers are becoming better people, but a result of the enormous economic development and cultural exchange with the outside world. In other words due to trade. Money is power, and as regular Chinese start getting money they start getting power. It's an unstoppable process.

Two thoughts.

1. The Russian path of freeing up political life but not economical life has failed, while the opposite Chinese path seems incredibly productive.

2. The strategy to NOT trade with Cuba is an incredible mistake. With the opposite US policy, Cuba would probably be another Poland today.

Re:Sigh...

[wilder_card]

Good Lord, you're judging Americans by what's posted on Slashdot? No darn wonder you're upset.

Re:How sweet.

[innerweb]

But, then again, it is the little things that you start with when you are going for social change. You only wind up at the big things when the time has come. By letting a case go to court, especially if it wins, they are encouraging all kinds of other citizens to start taking their issues to court as well. Once the people get a taste of self-respect, they will not want to let go.

InnerWeb

Doubtful

[WindBourne]

This is not the kind of thing that Chinese gov. will use a prison. Keep in mind that the gov. actually uses the prison rather sparingly. Once they decide to punish, they are harsh, but unless a real crime was committed or the gov is out to set examples for the west or local population, prison is not used. The guy is actually fighting against a very minor item, and more importantly, he is staying within the boundaries of that the gov. wants. As long as he does that, nothing official will happen (though he may be harasses a bit, nothing too bad).

Chinese gov. is a totalitarian, but they have a problem. They are a relatively small group of ppl in control over the largest single group of ppl. They know that if the ppl rise up, they will lose. Tiananmen showed that they could lose control, though at that time, there was no real threat. A big part of that was the dissatisfaction with poverty as well as no route for none party members to go. Since that time, the party has worked hard to provide opportunity paths for their citizens.

Re:China gets better - I draw conclusions

[Bryansix]

2. The strategy to NOT trade with Cuba is an incredible mistake. With the opposite US policy, Cuba would probably be another Poland today. I actually agree with this. There was a time to place a trade embargo against Cuba but that time has come and gone. The US investments seized by the government of Cuba so many years ago are not going to be turned back over. Cuba also isn't a military threat to us by proxy anymore. So the reasons for the embargo are gone and the benefits of resuming trade with Cuba are great. For one maybe so many of them might not jump on floating innertubes and head to Florida.

Re:Heightism

[MightyYar]

I think you might want to consider that you live in a city with little to no grass.

I'm not the one that lives in a city with so little grass, yet still bought a dog! :)

Re:Sigh...

[Kineticabstract]

What sort of weird bigotry leads you to decide that it's difficult to "love and respect the American nation" because you disagree with the focus of an article in a newspaper? It would make more sense if you found it difficult to "love and respect" the Washington Post - or better yet, what if you were to limit your emotional vexation to having a tough time loving and respecting the author of the article in question? It'll be far less taxing on you emotionally, which seems to be a concern.

I'm not really trying to limit the degree to which you find it difficult to love and respect an entire nation of individual entities. Speaking as one tiny portion of the nation in question, I don't love you either, so you don't have to feel guilty about this odd difficulty you're having. Perhaps therapy would help you.

Re:How sweet.

[mea37]

Just out of curiousity, is this the informed opinion of one who

• lives in China and has lived there for many years
• no longer lives in China, but did live there for many years
• has at least visited China (and spent his time there actually observing the government)
• holds a diplomatic, intelligence, or other position that gives him special insight into the operations and motives of the Chinese government, or
• really doesn't know anything about it but likes to talk trash about any foreign regime worse than his own?

Cause, you know, I know the Chinese government doesn't respect human rights, and I know their excuses and whining about not being "lectured to" by the West are crap, but at the same time I also know that we tend to get a very one-sided view, and if you don't think there's a propoganda machine involved in your perception of the Chinese government you're quite naive. So most people who would try to predict the outcome of a Chinese citizen's interaction with his government are in no position to do so. Just sayin'.

Re:Sigh...

[tsch]

Well, the law about dog height is a different than the censorship issue. Chen is suing over the censorship of his post. The dog law is only a law in Beijing; censorship is a National/Party issue.

jandersen wrote...

And strictly speaking, we don't know whether his posting was actually removed by somebody who was a member of any government or indeed the Communist Party. In fact, the most likely scenario is that some employee at whichever web-hosting company runs the blog saw some reference to Beijing's local government and automatically deleted the post without even reading it further.

From TFA:

When [the post] was taken down, Chen in effect sued his own Web site. Although Chen knew the Internet host was acting on orders from a "black hand," or censor, legally his target had to be the host organization that physically knocked him off, he said.

"They explained. It's not their fault, and I understand that," he said.

I guess we can now argue about whether the host is passing the buck onto the government, but there isn't much reason to not believe them. It isn't like the Chinese government isn't known for overreacting over online criticism. [zonaeuropa.com]

So how can this become 'a bold challenge' that illustrates that 'some of China's educated elite may be growing impatient with a one-party authoritarian system'?

From TFA again:

As far as is known, Chen's filing, at the Xicheng District Court in central Beijing, marked only the second time that a Chinese citizen has gone to court over party censorship.

...

Chen, 65, a retired Commerce Ministry official and U.N. Development Program accountant

Being the second to challenge the government of a state known to not take kindly to dissent is pretty bold. And based on Chen's resume he sounds like an educated guy. Want to debate about whether he's 1337 or not?

Re:Heightism

[dwater]

>> It's "okay" for a dog to piss on the street because no one has figured out a good alternative yet.

Sounds like the Chinese government have made a good start to me. Now they just need to ban all dogs.

Well, if that's the reason, then they might start by banning humans.

It is common practice for young children to pee or poop on the street in China. All the young children have special trousers/pants with a split between the legs that reaches all the way from back to front, such that it is almost like the trousers are actually two pieces joined at the belt. It looks relatively normal while walking, but opens up conveniently when squatting. If the child is too young to squat on their own, the parent can hold them up while they're in the squatting position, and just hold them near the ground.

You thought you were careful to avoid poop on the pavement(sidewalk). You're absolutely certain to in China.