Chinese Force Mass Closure Of Net Cafes 497
Chien Andalusia writes "According to this article from the BBC, the Chinese authorities closed 12,575 net cafes towards the end of 2004. Due to the expense of computer hardware, net cafés have become very popular in China in recent years. The laws governing such cafés are very strict, especially in relation to minimising the amount of exposure children can get to the internet. For example, no net café is allowed to open within 200 metres of a middle or elementary school. The article also briefly discusses other restrictions imposed on Chinese net cafés."
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Give 'em Alcohol (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Give 'em Alcohol (Score:5, Funny)
Like in Indiana (Score:3, Interesting)
That's kinda like in Indiana how there is a law that says you can't sell alcohol within 150 feet of a church.
I worked at a grocery store once that couldn't sell it because of that silly law.
Re:Give 'em Alcohol (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, sure. Cause what we really need is a half a billion or so more drunk people surfing the web and posting stuff on Slashdot.
Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
Now if only the RIAA/MPAA would learn this lesson.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
For instance, don't you think they realize on some level whats REALLY going on, i.e. they're being censored. Upon discovering that, I'd be inheriently curious.. what exactly is it they're protecting me from? And lo, the ball and started rolling...
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
Because our society values the freedom to make your own decisions. That's why there's a stink everytime the gov't tries to restrict our expressions.
In China and other places, the people are brought up believing in the Government as a protector, as a father. Since there is little to contradict this, they believe that the government is acting in their best interests when it tells them not to do something. Because of their lifelong conditioning, they accept this fact and move on with their lives.
This is how humans in general operate, and because we are conditioned differently in the West, we have a different response to and view of our governments. North Korea is another example of this. There was a show on PBS showing the horrific conditions in the country. The only reason they put up with it is because they honestly feel that South Korea and their imperialist allies will kill each and every one of them. They are in a completely different reality.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Interesting)
I just wish there was a way to "un-program" them. Of course, from their point of view, this would be "capatalist brainwashing". I'd like to think that we're on the right side of things.. but how can we know ?
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, it's misguided to imagine that people starving in North Korea, say, or jailed for political dissidence in Zimbabwe, are doing
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
I've realized that I'm being manipulated every day, and I live in a western democracy. Do you know how very difficult it is to discern who is manipulating you in what way, and how they in turn have been manipulated? Do you understand how difficult it is when you cannot even trust your own mind and language, as you will find your very instincts erraneous and the very language biased?
In your average newspaper and newscast it's almost impossible to find a single unbiased and non-propagandistic article. They're as rare as factually correct articles, and often the two go hand in hand. As journalists no longer appear to have the time, and few the integrity, try to do the factchecking yourself, and trace interests and bias in the article, and compare between different ones.
It's not that the average person cant form an opinion, understand a problem or draw conclusions from the facts. It's that the average person does not have the time, inclination or opportunity to double-check and cross-reference every fact and opinion they hear and question every belief and opinion they have once they discover inconsistencies. It's not very rewarding or conductive to living a happy life.
Propaganda works. And you, I and the Chinese get tricked every day.
What exactly are they protecting you from?
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Insightful)
For a scholarly look at this issue read Edward Herman & Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media [amazon.com]. In it they describe in detail many, many examples how "the powers that be" in the U.S. of A. have used the structure of the mass media to distort the world view of the citizens of this [USA] country.
What exactly are they protecting you from?
As far as I can tell, the nature of Power is such that for the most part, those with it want to keep it. Additionally, money and influence are both part of and equivalent to Power. With [enough] money you can buy influence and with [enough] influence you can obtain money. In order to retain Power those with it must ensure not that the populace is well off, but that they are content enough that they do not rebel or otherwise try to overthrow those in Power.
As much as the United States is a democracy, true democracy (in which all have a generally equal say) is impossible if there is a large concentration of Power (money and/or influence). If Power is not [relatively] evenly spread, then those with it can get a larger say by either force or by manipulating those without Power into agreeing with them.
So, what exactly are they protecting you from? In general, feelings of dissatisfaction with the state of your world (as it reflects on them) and your place in it. This manipulation can come in many forms, but several common ones that are repeated over and over are:
- Enemies: Enemies focus attention away from domestic problems to external entities, as well as providing a framework for "Be happy, at least you aren't in xxxxxx" comments.
- "Mindless" Entertainment: The more entertained you are, the less likely you are to rebel. "The Matrix" is an extreme example of this.
- Playing on dreams: The "American Dream" is partially summarized as the opportunity of anyone who "works hard enough" to climb the economic and social ladders. In the current day and age (as well as many past) this is no more true than elsewhere in the world. A very few people truly go from "rags to riches" while the rest of us stay plus or minus a few degrees from the place where we were born. The promise of the "American Dream" is repeated so often though that most people take it to be truth, thereby voting for tax cuts for the rich on the belief that they will soon be rich too.
These and other tools can and are used by those with Power to protect the rest of us from the harsh truth that we are being cheated and our situation would be better if those with Power didn't have it.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Interesting)
Bad example.
Hitler was an extreme Leftist.
Mussolini would be the one that you're looking for, he was an extreme Rightist (pretty damn close to the same degree as the current American administration).
Apart from the whole holocaust thing ( which I'm not belittling, it just isn't relevant to the left/right distinction ) there really isn't much of a difference between the two which shoul
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Interesting)
The point is acknowledged that Chomsky is far from "centrist", extremely so in fact.
To see a book written by Mr. Chomsky come to the conclusion that capitalism is bad, wealth and thatpower must be "evenly distributed" is about as surprising as hearing water is wet.
Please note that the views about Power/money/influence beginning with As far as I can tell, the nature of Power... are my own. If Mr. Chomsky has expressed similar views then I applaud him for reaching similar conclusions in his own inquiries into the state of the world.
Nowhere in my reading of Manufacturing Consent (MC) did I see any any anti-capitalist references. The only place MC comments on "even distribution of power" (that I noticed) is in discussing the 1984 elections in Guatemala. Chomsky and Herman question how meaningful elections could be in a state where power is concentrated in the hands of an authoritarian junta that has just executed or "disappeared" most of the journalists, political rivals, and judiciary in the country. I have not read any of Chomsky's other writings, so I cannot speak on them.
Nice sig: So let me ask you: are you more proud of your ignorance or your bias?
The question implies that ignorance and bias go together and encourages the reader to fix the bias by fixing the ignorance. I heartily agree with this viewpoint, which is part of why I found reading MC so interesting, even IF the the author's positions are in some way as baseless as those of Limbaugh. The important thing is to gather one's information from a variety of independent sources (including direct observation where possible) so that one can make informed opinions and choices about the world.
Though Rush pushes this limit, I do not believe that anyone can lie and misrepresent in everything that they say. Included in the deception are little scraps of truth buried in page B17, Appendix 25, or in what things one observes at events first hand, but are not said by others reporting on the event or using that event to push their agenda.
Your post induced me to read up on Mr. Chomsky as I didn't know much about the man or his views aside from reading one of his books. Wikipedia has a very in-depth article [wikipedia.org] that discusses many points of view on the man and the cult of personality surrounding him. As with everything, somewhere amongst the words of critics and of followers lie small truths. That he (or any other person) is a lier and propagandist or an insightful thinker that cares more about ideals than opinion is something one must discover for one's self and is not something just to take a single source's word for.
More thoughts on capitalism, wealth, and power:
As they are by definition made up by more than one person, all societies are by definition compromises between the desires of their members. Various societies try to balance these desires by employing various economic systems. In a [completely fictional] utopia all people would be able to have anything that they want and never have to deal with fulfilling desires of others that conflict with their own. As the world is finite conflicts do arise and economic systems are employed to work these conflicts out. The general hope (I believe) is that the chosen economic system will provide a basis for supporting the other ideals of a society; be they listed in the US Bill of Rights or others such as a right to education, a right to health care, or a right to choose to garden in the nude. What ever they are, these ideals of a society provide the framework for discourse and function within it.
I have no problem with laizes-faire capitalism, regulated capitalism, socialism, communism, or any other economic system as long as the chosen one[s] allows the ideals of my society to flourish internally. The problem I have is
Info may get out, but it has no real potency (Score:3, Insightful)
I used to believe that.
Now I no longer do.
There is all kinds of information on the Bush administration that people, including those that served in his first administration, were desperate to get out to the American public, including specifics on his incompetence with respect to guarding against terror, the war on terror, the misinfor
Re:Info may get out, but it has no real potency (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it has something to do with people basically being terrified of the unknown and the uncertainty in life. This is why we have constructs like Religion, its all just coping mechanisms.
The danger is w
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:5, Funny)
the number of dissidents it will have to
arrest. You can't expect their government to
build hundreds of new prisons without having
new labor contracts already signed by Western
corporations. The PRC government does have
rudimentary knowledge about supply and demand,
and staying in the "sweet spot" for labor costs.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:2)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:4, Insightful)
Must even the most un-related news items be somehow tortured into a reason to self-proclaim one's rights to an artist's work, unpaid-for? Some Chinese citizen sitting in a net cafe "knowing" the news is not the same as you sitting in your living room "knowing" the latest Green Day CD without paying for it.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:2, Insightful)
Or maybe when the news itself is copyrighted, and they start using copyright as a tool of censorship, then you'll reconsider? It's all just bits and bytes. Arbitrarily deciding that some arrangements of 1s and 0s is music that should land you in jail if you copy it, but that another is current news that it's immoral to censor is somewhat dumb.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Insightful)
While some may agree with your premise, your argument is bad. Apply the same logic to some other thing. Say pictures. Why are some pictures like pornography cens
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:3, Insightful)
both are important, and both should be legal.
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:4, Insightful)
both are important, and both should be legal.
Well, sure. But when an artist chooses to sell their work, and someone else chooses to find a way to get it without paying for it, that's not a freedom of speech issue. That's about people wanting the work that the artist produces, and not wanting to pay for it.
Nothing about " Freedom of speech out the window" (Score:2, Interesting)
If there would be "speech" during the course, its just someone looking for ONS, instead of the "POLITICAL FREEDOM OF SPEECH". Most adult will us
Re:Sigh, Freedom of speech out the window (Score:2, Informative)
Net cafes in China are mostly **GAME** cafes. that's why there is a restriction that no net café is allowed to open within 200 metres of a middle or elementary school.
In June 2002, a net cafe in Beijing is burned by 3 middle school students for game playing conflicts, 25 people died.
I just wish you guys to know that closing net cafes has nothing to do with free-speech or free information or other free shits.
I just hate the blind prejudice and stupid arrogant expressed by some
How knowing you all are... (Score:2, Interesting)
Don't you think the Chinese government already know that they can't keep easily accessible information away from people? These people are clever - they are after all bringin
Yay communism (Score:5, Insightful)
China: The Biggest Red State.
Re:Yay communism (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yay communism (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps it's because the rigid top-down political structure that always seems to accompany it lends itself to these kind of abuses. Perhaps it's that people who implement communism feel that the common man is too stupid to be trusted, and must be censured and control
Re:Yay communism (Score:2)
Communism, when practiced properly, can be pretty cool. I'm more of a socialist, though ;)
Re:Yay communism (Score:2)
Maybe it's because the only "Communist" states we see are also totalitarian regimes? I think if you look at ALL totalitarian regimes throughout history, you'll see censorship being the most common trait. It even extends to the current US administration (they use censorship quite often, the most high-profile use in recent years was the "no coffins" rule from the Pentagon).
So, I think censorship is more of a totalitarian trait than a communist one.
Re:Yay communism (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the idea. Everyone falls in love with communism when they read Marx. Everyone loves to TALK about communism. They write papers, they prostelyze about its virtues, and how wonderful it could be.
But how is it, something so good on paper could always seem to be implemented wrong. Must be the wrong leaders, they say. 'My gang would implement communism better', they write.
Maybe communism on PAPER leaves something out, that communism in PRACTICE always
Re:Yay communism (Score:5, Insightful)
It is impressive how long rhetorical terms can last. Thus, Communism died in the old USSR when Stalin took power and became in all but name a new tsar. But Western propagandists still used that country as an example of Communism 50 years later, despite all the objections that the term no longer applied in any meaningful fashion.
It's likely that 50 years from now, Western politicos will still be using China as an example of Communism, in their attempts to extend the old Communist/Capitalist false dichotomy.
It's really just a way of blindly using code words to avoid at reality. A reasonable approach would be to simply treat terms like "Communist", "Capitalist", etc. as symptoms of writing without much thought or understanding. It's hardly worth debating when such terms appear, since (as a form of Godwin's observation) such terms usually mean that no reasonable discussion will be possible. In American politics, the terms "Liberal" and "Conservative" have come to have the same import.
OTOH, if someone refers to events in China as "Chinese", reasonable discussion of events there might be possible. The current rulers of China aren't beholden to any outside ideology; they are their own people, with their own ideas and goals. Understanding will come from talking about them as they are, not by describing them with foreign words that don't apply very well.
On the "death" of communism... (Score:4, Insightful)
Some aspects of it are.
"The current ruling gang apparently doesn't even give it lip service any more."
They give it A LOT of lip service. It's still in all of the major speeches during national holidays.
"Thus, Communism died in the old USSR when Stalin took power and became in all but name a new tsar."
That's news to Nikita Kruschev, who was essentially replaced by commitee. No one even knew who the "one guy" in charge was for a couple of years after his removal. Eventually, it was discovered that the Central Commitee picked Leonid Breznhev as the General Secretary. The party regained control after the death of Stalin, and stayed in control until Gorbachev. The attempted coup was BY the major powers of the party. So please don't pretend that communism never existed after Stalin. For all of the evil of that system, the party did pick leadership in an orderly fashion after that.
"...the old Communist/Capitalist false dichotomy."
If you REALLY think there's no difference between capitalism and Soviet style communism, then no rational words are going to sway you.
"...not by describing them with foreign words that don't apply very well."
When they stop calling themselves communists, then maybe we will too. Again, the Chinese leadership still embraces the Marxist/Maoist imagery and speech, voluntarily. No one from the West forced it on them, so please stop acting like we are doing just that. THEY (the governement) identify themselves as communist.
BTW, there ARE still true believers in power in China, many in the military. They don't like the trappings of a market economy, but they do like the money it brings in to pay for planes, tanks, missles, ships, and now, the space program.
Yay capitalism (Score:3, Insightful)
If China ever was truly communist (which I doubt), it sure as hell ain't now.
As someone said, when they embraced capitalism, China went from being one of the last major left-wing dictatorships to being one of the last major right-wing dictatorships.
Which doesn't necessarily make them any more free.
It's all bullcrap anyway; the supposedly left-wing North Korea is run in a pseudo-monarchistic manner by Kim Jong-Il, who took over from his father. This is about as un-left wi
Re:Yay communism (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course. And, as here in the US, attempts to block children's exposure to the Internet will have a valuable effect: It tells the children where the forbidden knowledge is to be found. Those who want to learn will know where to look. And the next generation will be fluent users of the Internet.
That's what we want, of course. So we should applaud all such attempts to block children's access to
Re:Yay communism (Score:3, Insightful)
It is NOT ANY governments' responsibility to protect you or anyone else from "bad" ideas. This is the very definition of censorship. If you have kids it is YOUR responsibility to educate them about the "bad" stuff out there.
People do not gain the ability to cope with the horrors, scam arti
Let's reward them ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Let's reward them ... (Score:2, Funny)
This just in... (Score:3, Insightful)
So, why is this news?
Re:This just in... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right, human rights abuses are only interesting when it's new/exciting information .. because it's not about the information, it's all about the topical buzz, the fashionable memes, yeah man. I mean who wants to discuss China's ongoing human rights abuses, that's like sooo yesterday already! What's "cool" today?
Uh huh... (Score:4, Insightful)
And we're surprised why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And we're surprised why? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they're a totalitarian capitalist country now. Arguably fascistic, but certainly not democratic.
Re:And we're surprised why? (Score:2)
No, they're a totalitarian capitalist country now.
According to Bill, it's a new form of capitalism.
China has created brand-new form of capitalism: Bill Gates [yahoo.com]
Re:And we're surprised why? (Score:3, Insightful)
"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
[/quote]
China, like most other countries (actually with or without democracy) rely on most of the people being content. Internet is too valuable a tool, and people would be upset if they couldn't access it at all. So you try to please the majority, yet at the same time crack down on those that could challenge your authority. Totalitarian regimes impose as much apathy as loyalty. Don
The Children (Score:5, Funny)
~D
Re:The Children (Score:2)
Obviously, the communist Chinese government does not believe that parents should have the sole responsibility of regulating their children's use of the Internet.
Kinda like gaming here.
The Censorship Technology Is Good If Used Properly (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Censorship Technology Is Good If Used Prope (Score:3, Interesting)
It backfires! (Score:3, Insightful)
There is a psychological phenomenon in humans that control-freaks consistenly forget. Anything that you deny to a human appears more desirable to that human. If you say, "You can't do that," then the person being addressed will tend to want to do it *more*, not *less*.
For exa
Is not only about censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
I am giving a basic computer course in an elementary school (9 to 12 years old) and they are asking me to teach them just to chat, even before learning how to type!
Re:Is not only about censorship (Score:2)
My parents regretted buying that thing for me for Christmas... But I think I turned out O.K. Just took the slipping of some grades to show me that I couldn't just veg out in front of it and ignore my other responsibilities... (Yes, my parents "attempted" to limit my time on it, so it wasn't their fault....)
Not as bad as you may first think... (Score:5, Insightful)
I had no problems accessing the Net from my hotel - albeit an intl. dialup connection - and even visited a few Net cafes. Most people I spoke to said the Internet was great but that we Americans don't realize that what we may want or consider a "great freedom" here in the US is not considered as important in the rest of the world. (Alright before you start going berserk and start spewing off about basic human rights, consider that we have made many, many mistakes in the past and it took us time as well to reach a state where we consider these freedoms as our rights; give 'em time!)
Anyway, my point being, Internet was completely accessible except for a few sites that seemed to be proxied out at the Net cafes - Slashdot being one of them!
Re:Not as bad as you may first think... (Score:2, Troll)
China, for example, has a lot more economic freedom than America (most obviously, I believe the top income tax rate is only 15%), but less freedom of speech (though, today, that difference is rapidly decreasing).
Things in China are CRAZY. (Score:3, Insightful)
So, to try and convince the public, they announce that the thing that THEY don't like is dangerous for children...
THEN, once you've established that it is bad for children, you can get rid of it altogether in the name of protecting children!
I'm glad that would never happen here!
Chinese basement nerds of tommorow (Score:4, Funny)
China Prohibits Freedom! (Score:4, Interesting)
Because we love freedom!
China (Score:2, Interesting)
I truly believe that education is the silver bullet, that information and communication are what will lift the human race to heights und
Thinking of the children (Score:5, Interesting)
The main causes given for the closures is locating a Cybercafé right next to a school and allowing minors free access to pornography. What chance do you think a Cybercafé would have to continue trading in the EU, US etc. if it was found to be a magnet for truants and/or providing unfettered access to pornography to minors? They also restrict violent games to certain age groups, which is different to the age requirements we have on our computer game boxes, how exactly? Doom 3 is rated "18" in the UK for example, and companies can be prosecuted for breaking that restriction and selling the game to a minor. The same goes for logging all outbound access - you'd be insane not to log everything if you were running a Cybercafé in the event someone launched a cracking attempt from your premises.
OK, I do have concerns that these logs are going to be "auditted" by the Chinese government for what they might see as subversive elements, disloyal behaviour or whatever. The censorship of free access to information, even if it *is* pornography, should not be blocked - immoral and illegal should not automatically be the same thing. Still, at least the Chinese appear to understand that restricting Internet content is an internal matter and are making an effort to deal with it themselves instead of trying to ram their legislation down the throats of other nations. Now if only they would let their people have a larger say in what was and was not permitted...
This closure is nothing with evil government (Score:4, Informative)
Before jumping to conclusion (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.edu.cn/20020618/3059163.shtml
Not many businesses in China respect the safety standards that the western world take for granted. There are many ways, including bridery, to get around the safety inspections. So occasionally the government has to do some massive crack down. For one, to try to control the internet to please the critics in the communist party. Also, nobody would bride the safety inspectors if the government does not show that they are serious about the safety standards. A few weeks later these net cafe would be re-opened. And everything goes back to business as usual.
Content censoring is always there. But that's not the only reason they close down these net cafe. Money is the reason.
Difference between communism and capitalism (Score:3, Funny)
In communist China you have to ask permission for your basic rights... (and have them refused of course...)
In capitalist US you have to pay for your rights... (again and again and again...)
People just don't care (Score:5, Insightful)
I am from Ukraine, and in November, when it was Orange Revolution here in Ukraine, I've read various people comments on bbc.com on that topic (our revolution). While most comments were positive, I remember one comment from china's women; she was very negative and said that people should better care about other things as food, money and such.
May be for china people it's acceptable that your goverment are gangsters and thiefs as long as they give you enouth food. For me, it isn't.
PS. Sorry for my bad English.
My experience in China (Score:4, Informative)
In the states, you never hear these rationales for the crackdowns against Falun Gong. They're not even brough up to be discredited, which makes me wonder if they're true or not?
More to the point, is the American gov't not explaining China's good reasons for cracking down on Falun Gong so that it keeps their citizens feeling superior to the Chineese? "Oh, we have religious freedom and they don't" etc. When the worst abuses against religion happened during the Cultural revolution, or currently against those religious groups with separatist ambitions (or who just don't want their land exploited by the influx of the ethnic Han majority) such as some Muslims in Xinjiang, Buddists in Tibet, etc.
A while ago, there was the whole issue of the Chinese embassy bombing in Belgrade by accident.
The Chinese line was that it was deliberate and pointless. The American line was that it was an accident. The London guardian at one point ran a piece on how the Chinese embassy had been quite likely rebroadcasting radio signals from Serb forces [guardian.co.uk] in violation of the laws governing embassies (neutrality) and how the bombing run that hit the embassy was the only one which didn't go through the NATO chain of command, but came directly from the CIA.
And how much did we in the states hear about this second, more likely explanation?
There were a few internet sites blocked in China. And it was hard to tell which ones were deliberate and which ones were accidental since there seemed to be very little set policy on the matter. China may censor, but it seems to lack the rigid efficiency and formality that one imagines when they think of the USSR or Nazi Germany. The place is anarchy and clannish with an authoritarian frosting. Things like the status and power of your family, and which powerful people you have pissed off and how respectfully you criticize power have a huge amount to do with what you can get away with.
The cultural revolution is over. The boys in power in China are mainly concerned with protecting their power and sometimes increasing it.
And despite the attempt at censorship, there was a lot of information about government corruption which managed to leak out anyways. (Chinese gov't billionaires, Political elite getting away with murder, etc. )
If there's one thing I learned in China, it was how deftly the US government manages to control the information which reaches the majority of its citizens, despite the existance of a 'free press.'
Re:My experience in China (Score:4, Insightful)
> lot of information about government corruption
> which managed to leak out anyways. (Chinese gov't
> billionaires, Political elite getting away with
> murder, etc. )
It sounds just like old Imperial China. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
> If there's one thing I learned in China, it was
> how deftly the US government manages to control
> the information which reaches the majority of
> its citizens, despite the existance of a 'free
> press.'
WEll, I'll wager that the US's press is far more free than anything China's ever seen. For every news source that seems quite happy to tow the line (Fox News anyone), there are others that are eager to attack the government of the day on any issue.
A free press isn't about excluding government propaganda, but rather about debunking it.
Re:No Spam (Score:3, Funny)
That's what happens when you put up a national firewall that lets port 25 thorugh.
Re:No Spam (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No Spam (Score:2)
Yes, it does make them worse. (Score:2, Insightful)
There is a big difference.
Re:Yes, it does make them worse. (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, it's more like:
If we don't like our government, they make us think we can vote them out, and fix the election.
Is it still such a big difference?
If you think yes, factor in the you-don't-believe-in-our-values-so-we'll-hold-you - without-charges-lawyer-or-rights improvements to the penal code, a.k.a Patriot Act.
Re:Yes, it does make them worse. (Score:2)
Didn't your mother teach you that two wrongs don't make a right? It is perfectly OK to be against both the transgressions of the USA government and the Chinese government.
I just happen to think that living in China is far worse than the USA in terms of personal
Re:Yes, it does make them worse. (Score:2)
Of COURSE China has done some shitty things in the past. No-one is going to disagree with that. I'm just showing that the US isn't all that great, either. Call it levelling the playing field, if you will :)
Re:Yes, it does make them worse. (Score:2)
No, you shoot them instead.
Again, China has more economic freedom, but less freedom to criticise the state. But Americans don't exactly have a lot of that left either post-9/11.
Certainly I'd far rather fly to and from China than I would fly to and from America these days with the minimum-wage Nazis on the prowl for 'terrists'. Neither state is anywhere near perfect, but China is heading towards mor
Re:Yes, it does make them worse. (Score:2)
Remember? Democracy? One person, one vote? That's not how it us under the electoral college.
Re:And how many thousands... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:And how many thousands... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And how many thousands... (Score:2)
However it is the worlds most powerful country and it may well have been the case in the past that other countries in the same position may have just suited themselves that doesn't mean it's a good thing and indeed a lot of Empire began to fall apart when they did start to consider their effects on those around them, this is one reason why America is not still a part of the British Empire.
Re:And how many thousands... (Score:2)
Re:And how many thousands... (Score:2)
Re:Finally (Score:2)
Ofcourse some coutries have good enough propganda machines on their own so that by calling on patriotism they can counter that propaganda, but not every government feels secure in that they will succeed in such.
Re:Finally (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Finally (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:To all America bashers, and China-philes (Score:2, Funny)
Re:To all America bashers, and China-philes (Score:2)
By which time they'll be just another capatalist hegemony, much like yesterday's Britain and today's US. If you dislike capatalist hegemonies so much, why are you gloating over this?
Re:To all America bashers, and China-philes (Score:3, Informative)
The word actually is Sinophiles
Re:So? (Score:2)
Re:So? (Score:2)
The Chinese Government is unjustly limiting the freedoms of its populous by restricting actions that have no effect on the rights of others. To simply write it off means that you woudn't mind if the your government took away your Internet access to keep you from "bad things."
I find it funny that most right-wingers are such big apologists for brutal dictatorsh
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's take that idea to a logical conclusion:
Sudan...it iss their country, their rules.
Serbia...it is their country, their rules.
We can go back in history and include Cambodia, Nazi Germany,
I guess hatred of America is so strong these days that the Slashbots feel compelled to defend every other government, even some of the most despotic and totalitarian.
Re:China remains an Evil Empire (Score:5, Informative)
You seriously have no idea what you are talking about.
Re:China remains an Evil Empire (Score:3, Interesting)
France is not the beacon of anyone. The left fails to hate France, simply refraining from jingoist sentiments spewed by neoconservatives. IF you wish to call that admiration, by all means d
Re:China remains an Evil Empire (Score:3, Interesting)
Case in point. There are at least eight million people in New York City. Did most of them report to work? Did offices and stores close because everyone was going to be out protesting in the streets? No. You
Re:China remains an Evil Empire (Score:4, Informative)
China has around 70% the arable land that the United States does yet it has around 4 times the population (give or take). With numbers of people like that and the sheer logistics of feeding them all, a more heavy handed form of 'population control' is needed above and beyond lightly recommending how people do things. This is why you've seen policies such as the 1 child rule and a general aversion to completely opening up internet access to the public. Some would say that this keeps them in a state of ignorance, but honestly we as Americans have absolutely no idea what it would be like to have that many Americans running around.
Imagine this country with say.. 2.4 billion people walking around. It'd be a nightmare and if you think that the government of the US, if faced with the task of controlling and moving society along with that many people around, wouldn't impelement hard core big brother control, you have another thing coming. Free is a great idea when you have sea to shining sea and amber waves of grain, things get a bit hairer when famines could potentially kill HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS people and cause unrest on a scale never seen before by man if the dinner plate isn't filled. Also keep in mind that people are generally stupid and impulsive when they get into large groups (regardless of beliefs). This fact about human behavior has the potential to produce some pretty disasterous results.
People like to point out that India is the world's largest democracy. What they fail to mention is that India also has one of the longest lived and highly adhered to caste structures ingrained into the very fabric of their society. So yeah, they're democratic but at the same time everyone is 'assigned' a place that they cannot move from, so you're back to rigid control of thoughts and ideas in one form or another. The benefit that India has is that their generally effective use of education still bolsters innovation.
China does what it has to do to get the job done. No more, no less. I don't like the fact that they're communist. I don't like that fact that they censor and propogandize everything, but looking at it objectively, I can understand the effectiveness of the method.