Slashdot Mirror
Forget MTV, I Want My Internet!
shystershep writes "Teenagers in China are apparently pretty serious about getting internet access. This article on the English version of the online newspaper Xinhuanet details gang-type activity to get around China's ban on persons under 18 entering internet cafes. I may get a little cranky if I don't get my daily net fix, but I've never beat anyone with a fire extinguisher because of it (not that I remember, anyway)."
I really have to wonder to myself if the chinese govt has yet come to the realization that their constant drive to block/censor anti-govt internet content only leads to more anti-govt feelings of the people.
an internet version of tiannamen square?
wtf would that be exactly? what is the equivalent to a tank running over a protestor on the internet?
Indeed..Read this story for instance. The thing is, I don't think the Government there really cares if teens are using it to look at porn or not, although the crackdown on cafes earlier was supposedly to stop this sort of activity.
Any sort of information being freely disseminated by sources other than approved ones is seen there as a threat. I am simply stating a fact, not blindly bashing the Chinese government. They don't like news/information to come to the masses from sources they can't control.
Just think, if these stupid kids started beating the shit out of someone with actual power and authority, China might eventually have democracy. This is how revolutions are started, people. One small seed, one small desire to look at something that you can't look at, and eventually the opressors start feeling the heat.
ShortFormBlog: Writing a little. Saying a lot.
So now the have gangs walking around trying to get their internet and assault security staff from checking their ID.
Probably not very intelligent to mess with the staff of an internet cafe.
I wonder how hard it is to get internet access by just dialing up or using wardriving/company internet access in China...
Arbitrary age restrictions like these, especially over something as innocuous as information, are plainly bullshit.
You mean like barring something innocuous like a woman's breast on TV and imposing huge fines on the network which showed it? Or preventing children from seeing a movie with innocuous nudity in it? It's not just China where censorship happens over "innocuous information".
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
You're right, this is "not" a human rights issue. It is about the same as requiring people to be 18 to get a driver's license. Just because some 16 year olds want one, and beat up the vehicle licensing staff to get one, does not mean they should get them.
This is totally different from restricting access to information for adults, which China also does, and wrongly in my opinion. But please don't confuse a gang of hooligans' attempts to get what they want for a serious attempt at helping promote freedom of access to information.
These are not the kind of youth I want to take over. I think they are kind that grow into the people that ordered the Tiannamen square clampdown.
In other countries the control and censorship is done by direct action and by preventing people to access the information that might be potentially harmful. I think that this is an culture issue, it's just without any extra twists out there. They just ban it, so they don't have to really manipulate or regulate it.
And other countries have governments that allow people to access all the information, but instead put their efforts on manipulating the media indirectly to counter/soften the effects of unpleasant information or to draw attention from real problems to other things. This includes everything from feeding falsified information to advertisement-like careful timing, repeating, double meanings and so on.
Same shit, different implementation. Close your TV and your Internet, there's nothing to see here.
-el
This is proof that the Internet is, nowadays, the most powerfull media to allow for Freedom of Speech. If it wasn't so, why would the Chinese government be so worried about the Internet's influence on their citizens. I recall that this issue does not only affect minors, as there is a nationwide content barring scheme in China.
But if there's on thing that History teaches us is that no matter how harsh laws and enforcement are, there's no stopping for Man's will to be free.
I'm not trying to defend communism here, but the ideology behind communism does not imply totalitarian governing methods.
;)
The fact that most communistic governments has resolved to said measures is a sad fact that just proves that communism doesn't work
The only places communism truly works, are in anthills and termite nests.
China has a very checkered history of human rights abuses.
Look at what's happened in the middle east.
You can look at what's happened in the middle-east here.
The hypocrisy of it all is simply amazing.
I think Sony entertainment China should change their tagline to: "EverQuest, so good you'll maim and kill in order to maim & kill online!". Seriously though, isn't it time the chinese people did something about their draconian government enforcing such strange laws? I can understand some laws they have enforced (such as the laws preventing overpopulation (whether these laws work i don't know) this is nothing more than trying to keep the population dumb and uninformed. What the chinese youth should do is rebel against the government, and NOT the innocent internetcafe owners who are even more fearful of the government than they are. If only they could get organised (if only they had internet, heh) better.
Will wank off Linus Torvalds for fame.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you. This is a human rights issue. If the government can control the information that flows to the youth they can control everything. The Chinese government is denying the right to access information to the youth of China so that the only information those youth will have is government propoganda. Yes, youth are more impressionable than adults so you could argue that they need to be protected...but the only the that the Chinese government wants to "protect" them from are ideas that are unflattering to the Chinese governemnt. If thats not a human rights abuse, what is?
--HC
So I'm jump'n up and down screaming show me the money.
" Movie age restrictions are voluntary."
They aren't voluntary to the individuals forced to abide by them. Besides which, the only reason they exist is to keep the government from legislating involuntary restrictions. So the threat of force is still exists even if it isn't as direct as if the legislation was already enacted.
--HC
So I'm jump'n up and down screaming show me the money.
What Marxist theory advocates is a 'dictatorship of the proletariat'. This does not mean a 'dictatorship' in the sense of a small group of people telling everyone what to do; it comes from Marxist theory of the state, and is counterposed to the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and before that the dictatorship of the aristocracy (in feudalism) and before that the dictatorship of the slave-owners (in ancient society).
The point is that in Marxist theory the state itself is by its very nature a class dictatorship; it is the instrument of one class against another, or several others. In a theoretical dictatorship of the proletariat, because the vast majority of the population will have become proletarians as a result of capitalism (peasants gradually becoming rural proletariat as well), the dictatorship of the proletariat represents almost the entire population, i.e. like the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, it is democratic *within* *itself*, representing the interests of those who run it. So a dictatorship of the proletariat would be a democracy representing everyone except the leftovers--the bourgeoisie, and possibly the peasantry, although in practice, an alliance with the peasantry was made out of necessity if nothing else.
This then leads to the withering away of the state as such; if we see the state as being a representative of class interests, and the state now represents the only class, and is a weapon of repression against the tiny minority (Rupert Murdoch, Bill Gates, etc.) who would like to restore the old system, then once the new society is consolidated the state as a class dictatorship is no longer necessary, and withers away. This doesn't mean government withers away, just class dictatorship.
Don't criticise something you don't know anything about.
It's about a band of teenage criminals who'll pound the shit out of anyone not bowing down to their requests, whatever it would be.
Internet access is just a coincidal background of this story.
I think there is lots of things that these teenagers could do to gain wider access to the information they desire without attacking the poor souls who work at these cafes.
"Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man."
Mohandas K. Gandhi on nonviolence
Pragmatism as an ideology is not particularly pragmatic in the long term. Keep it in mind when you dismiss Free Software
Karzan's explanation is on-the-spot. If only those criticising Marx would read Marx every once in a while, such explanations would be superfluous, but unfortunately, even the /. audience seems to consist of people who are happy to parrot their high school history teachers, their parents or other 'authorities' when it comes to politics.
In China, a socialist revolution never took place. Mao's army, upon seizing a city, proceeded to ban unions and strikes, and left the police force that defended the old regime firmly in place. To call China a communist country is to show a complete lack of understanding of socialist politics.
Study Trotsky's work if you want to fine-tune your understanding of the travesties of socialism that were found in the Soviet Union, and elsewhere, after, say, 1925.
Whenever there's an article about China on Slashdot I always see so much clueless information being tossed about...
Here's some information from someone (a Westerner) who's lived here for around 3 years.
First of all, I guarantee you the children that did this did it because they're fucked up little shits. They certainly weren't doing it because of some freedom of information ideals. They were probably just pissed off cause they couldn't get on to play their MMORPGs and chat online. No matter if China's internet regulations are right or wrong, beating a guy over the head who's just trying to keep the store in business is not the way to change government policy. If anything, it just reinforces the opinion of the public that internet cafes are a bad influence on the young. Even my father-in-law, who is quite educated and a well respected school principal, thinks net cafes are evil places. Once when I told him I wanted to go check my email, he took my wife and I walking around town until we came upon a net cafe that didn't look too evil. It's a good thing I never told him I used to stay up all night in net cafes playing Starcraft with my friends while studying in Beijing!
Another thing people are forgetting is that this stuff is all dealing with internet cafes. It has nothing to do with what people do in their homes. Families are still free to have high speed internet in their homes no matter what age their children are. And anyone who is going to risk looking at censored information is probably going to do it from their own home. Almost all of the internet cafes are locked down to prevent users from messing with any internet settings, so it's not likely they'll be able to use proxies in the cafes anyway. In your home it's quite simple to go through a proxy. The people who really want outside information can get it easily enough. It's just the masses, who don't really care anyway, who can't get censored information.
Another thing, I always see people talking about how China's got so many laws against things such as pirated software, movies, music, and brand names but doesn't do anything about it. There's fake brand names everywhere, even in official franchise stores. And I can only recall one time that I saw official copies of movies and music for sale. Official software is easy enough to find, but nobody actually buys it. Anyway, my brother-in-law is the Secretary (not secretary) of the Consumer Affairs division of the Public Security Bureau in a large city, and I've asked him about this. They all know they could walk into any store and confiscate at least 95% of their goods, but they don't. If they did, stores would be going bankrupt all the time. If they tried selling official products most of them would go bankrupt too since nobody can afford to buy their products. So, should China protect the income of rich foreigners and bankrupt it's citizens, or should they protect their own and look the other way? It's a pretty easy decision, and most people forget the US did the same thing to England regarding copyrights not too long ago.
Sure, every once in a while there will be big crackdowns, and their real purpose is just to show investors. "Hey look, we're protecting copyrights! Come do business here!" More business investments in the country helps the economy, obviously. But everyone here knows the busts are for show. And most stores will be warned ahead of time so they can hide their products.
Bah I already wrote more than I thought I would...
If anyone actually read that whole message, congrats.
Do not anger the worm.
I think the poster you reacted to is right. These are exactly the kind of people who grow up to be dictators or the tools of dictators. What after all is a dictator? Someone who supresses others with violence and intimidation to get what they want. Exactly what these criminals did.
China has a law. It is a law not many others would agree with but then the US, so called bastion of freedom, has laws many others would not agree with. The previously mentioned ban on cannabis, somewhat legal in say holland and tolerated in most western nations, can get you a long time in jail in america. Would a gang rading a goverment run canabis plantation (for medicinal use) have the same kind of sympathy?
The only things these criminals have achieved is play exactly into the chinese goverment hand. They claim kids can't handle the internet and they have been proven right. After all throwing a fit and beating everyone up is hardly a sign that one is a responsible adult right?
Think of it in the same way as the "keep canabis illegal" crowd who uses every canabis related death as a sign of its evil (while totally forgetting that these deaths pale when compared to say alcohol related deaths).
I am not trying to defend the ban on internet access for minors (despite the bad joke that this would make online games a lot more enjoyable) but these kids are not protesting it. They are no more then any criminal who with violence breaks the law. No serious human rights defender would want to be associated with them.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Xiahua may not be the most reliable info source... On the other hand, I want to point out some interesting cultural difference to fellow ./ers.
First, the teenagers are not necessary "seeking information" in internet cafe. They are not likely to be the politcal dissent kind that most are thinking about. Or else, they will try to be as low key as possible. The "illegal" info can also be porn, mp3 etc. The most usual activity is PC gaming.
Second, video arcade (internet cafe nowadays) can be a real trouble spot for the teens who don't want to go home at midnight. Car is not that accessible in most Asian countries. Flats are small. Teens need to find a place to have their first cigarette, need to have a place to get together with their in-group...
Quite naturally, fist fights and gangster problems are quite common in this sort of environment... The nature is a bit similar to a bar without alcohol. Even Hongkong under the UK colonial control (before 1997) need to impose similar rule for the video arcade, ie no children under 16 are allowed to enter standard video arcade. Quite a few secondary friends had got beaten up/ money taken by the gangsters in the video arcades when they were young (sneaked into of course)...
Curb the free internet access is of course one of the communist party's agenda. But, the very real teenage problem should not be overlooked either.
These kids are more closely related to the looters and other proviteers that turn up in times of trouble.
America has got gangs who "protest" the laws on drugs in the US and they use violence too. Are these your revolutionaries? Or just simple criminals?
Don't mistake someone breaking a law for someone protesting a law. I know the world likes to romantize everything but the mafia was not defending the freedom of americans to drink for instance. They were just criminals breaking the law.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
extrapolating to the general state of 4 billion people from one 14 year old?
damn, that's a new level for retardedness. how about we extrapolate from Columbine?
"This article on the English version of the online newspaper Xinhuanet (...) but I've never beat anyone with a fire extinguisher because of it (not that I remember, anyway)."
What we have here is a state-run newspaper talking about kids trying to do what the state doesn't want them to do. Do you think the state will paint a rosy picture of them?
You'd have better luck getting the RIAA to admit that P2P really isn't all that bad.
In Orwell's Animal Farm the pigs at publically denounce alchohol, before they themselves become corrupted by it - but they still forbid other animals to drink. Perhaps the same is true of China - at first denouncing the internet, clearly the government must use it for administration / communication between departments - but they still control access to their citizens. Just a thought.
Well said.
Indeed, Eastern sensibilities are so profoundly different from those of the West that very few Westerners can even appreciate the mindset. The feeling of community and an individual's role simply diverge too radically between Asian and Eurocentric ( this includes US ) cultures.
Historically, Chinese have always looked to the past for an ideal society. The Golden Past, with the Golden Emperor and the time of perfect order. The underlying message is that the idealized perfection that once was can be attained again.
In the West, we look to the future. Probably due Christian ideals; the past has Sin, the future redemption. The ostensively Christian world is unusual in this, most other cultures strive to maintain harmony with some well defined past ideal rather than a nebulous future one.
On the surface the result is the same, both models are ultimately unattainable. But the perspective is quite different.
I've always been amazed at how well China took to the very Western ideals of Marx and Engle. Communism as a future, utopia ideology would seem to run counter to the perspective of the "center kingdom". Indeed, China even more than Japan has an historic disdain for Western philosophy. Interestingly, the ideals of universal equality did speak strongly to China, and there you are.
I think the problem with much of the USA-related rhetoric that's thrown around is it's mostly hyperbole -- too severe.
The States absolutely have a huge problem with its foreign policy. Too much mucking with foreign government's leading to terrorism, leading to yet again more mucking with foreign goverments.
The size of the domestic government has grown too much. The pendulum has swung too far with the advent of legislation like Patriot and DMCA. There sits a severely mentally impaired justice secretary. The President has the leadership qualities of a piece of cardboard.
But to say the US is Authoritarian is just too severe. You cannot compare the Chinese government and the US. By comparison to communist China, the USA is certainly the Land of the Free.
Do they block internet content? Have pro-choice folks been shot protesting in front of the white house and Supreme Court? Do you register with the government before going on vacation? Will the secret police come to get you in the night because your neighbor told the authorities about your anti-Bush discussion at the block party?
Authority certainly *does not* equal Authoritarianism. Nowhere in the West do we see the kind of tyranny that exists in Korea.
And yes, the voting/party system is screwed up and manipulative in America. But again -- that makes freedom an illusion? If the people of the USA got their collective heads out of their asses and elected a qualified, effective, third party to a major office, would the incumbant demo-plican stage a military uprising to stop the election results? Have the police ever visited your home for voting for another party, including the socialist party? I don't think Mary Cal Hollis has ever been imprisoned for what she believed.
I think all pleads/"Wake up America!" arguments I hear fall on deaf ears because of their extremity. You will not convince people to change their government by saying that it's just as bad as al-Qaeda. You will not convince people to change their government if you try to say that they're liberties are as restricted as the Chinese. It's not an apt comparison, and it turns most people off. Identify the problems for what they are, don't label them with such exaggerated terms.
In my humble opinion, the Chinese are prisoners of their government -- the Americans are prisoners of their own c complacency. But that does not disqualify them as free people, and it does not make their government Authoritarian.
Yes, the Chinese gov't did give its permission to publish this article as it's in the government run newspaper. Xinhua is the press arm of your favorite local despotic ruling party. As to their motives, I will never presume to know what irrational men (or women) are thinking.
I will say this, when I was in Beijing there was a huge complex of internet cafes just outside the South gate of Beijing University. We called them the flying fish (feiyu) because as students we could only read the pinyin and not the characters. Anyway, for 4 months I went almost everyday. I skipped a week while traveling. When I got back, they were all gone. We are talking about two blocks of cafes (it was massive). The reason? A communist party official touring the area thought the cafes were too Western. Granted, this was about the time that the U.S. spy plane landed on Hainan (sp) Island. The Commies are terribly conflicted. They want economic growth so they can skim off the top, but they have no desire to be responsible to the people. I give them 10, 15 years, tops.
...even if it is an inflammatory statement.
There should be one qualificatino though. A "disarmed society" would be ideal IF EVERYBODY was disarmed. Infortunately the world is far from an ideal place so long as someone, somewhere makes weapons.
In the American case I'd say most law-abiding gun owners are either hunters or those concerned about their personal safety, being US criminals tend to be quite a bit more armed in realation to those in other countries (that's a feedback loop of a different sort).
In the case of China, you have a population that is completely disarmed and a government (a REPRESSIVE one) that is VERY armed. The Chinese police force is not independent from the government ether, so it is not just there to enforce the law it is used as another weapon to protect government power. When a government cannot be voted out after all, the only possibility of regime change is a revolt so force is the most effective way to maintain power.
I'd say that in this case it is a relevant point. Teenagers are emulating their government because they see it gets what it wants through force and intimidation. This aggression is directed at regular citizens (the internet cafe owners) because the govenrment is much too powerful (and armed) to overpower when your weapons happen to be rocks, bats, fire extiguishers or whatever. The shop owner can't defend himself, but the policeman can shoot them on site.
Business owners/operators in China won't pressure the governmet to change the law because they value their new-found economic freedom too much to risk losing it. Government won't accomodate their every concern and if they put up too much of a fuss they'll lose their business at least, or at worst be imprisoned for subversion.
So what is the best solution? How do we cut off that "feedback loop"? I could not live in a society that is completeyl disarmed while its government is armed to the teeth. I'd also be a bit nervous living in parts of the US where it seems any old nut can get himself a gun.
It'd be really nice if all the weapons in the world cold e destroyed, but that isn't going to happen...if all gons were destroyed, people will make use of other items as weapons. So Of the two "evils" I'll take the US one thank you very much. I'd probably temper that with laws that do not restrict ownership but instead govern BEHAVIOUR in the intrests of public safety--and those laws should be enforced effectively. Deer hunting with automatic weapons? I think not! Loaded, concealed weapons on posession in public, urban areas? Not the best idea. Hunters, target shooters, security and police personnel, any personal firearm safely stored in the owner's home? The cost of messing with those situations for outweighs the potential safety concerns.