Slashdot Mirror


Strategy Videogame Upsets Chinese, Gets Banned

An anonymous reader writes "China's State News Agency, Xinhua reports that China's Ministry of Culture has banned a computer game for 'distorting history and damaging China's sovereignty and territorial integrity'. Paradox's PC strategy game 'Hearts of Iron', was accused of distorting historical facts in describing Manchuria, West Xinjiang, and Tibet as independent sovereign countries in the maps of the game. 'All these severely distort historical facts and violate China's gaming and Internet service regulations,' the Ministry's Game Products Censorship Committee said. 'The game should be immediately prohibited.' [via China Digital]"

108 of 711 comments (clear)

  1. Sorry, China by Kid+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    no matter how much it may sting, you can't repress the truth forever. I'm sure the people whom you've stomped on won't forget the truth.

    1. Re:Sorry, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In many of the Romance of the Three Kingdom games by Koei (the older ones as far as I can remember), Taiwan is not part of the territory of any of the mainland warlords. Why wasn't China upset then? (Maybe I was too young.) Why now, and why over such a game?

    2. Re:Sorry, China by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, most of China was at some point not part of China. Over the millenia, that distinction no longer matters. You don't have to repress the truth forever, just long enough.

    3. Re:Sorry, China by ericspinder · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now that's one way to break into China market, I wouldn't be surprised if this game becomes a big underground hit there.

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    4. Re:Sorry, China by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 4, Funny
      We also interview a man in Dayton, Ohio who is actually surprised!

      You misspelled "Berkeley, California".

      --
      All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
    5. Re:Sorry, China by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow, two great points there, buddy. Let me help sum up:

      1. It doesn't matter that the Chinese government represses the truth, because the U.S. does as well! So it's all good!

      2. Fictional movies with Russian villains is the same thing as changing the entire history of a region to suit your political ends and demanding that a billion people believe your version.

      Glad you thought about this before posting. You're really smart!

    6. Re:Sorry, China by AirLace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You underestimate the extent of the nationalism found in China. By and large, the Chinese people adamantly claim these territories to be part of China. They just won't accept any other interpretation.

      Point in case: Herbert Xu, a Chinaman, resigned from the Debian project after the Taiwanese flag made it into a KDE package. Note that this package was not even one that he maintained, and that he had been part of the project for several years.

      With feelings as strong as that, it's going to take more than the latest and greatest 3D arcade game to sway people of their political convictions. After all, independent thought and rebellion can be a costly passtime in China, particularly when it turns you against your government.

    7. Re:Sorry, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering China has virtually no legitimate claim to Taiwan (don't take my word for it, look it up: China controlled Taiwan for only about 200 years of the thousands of years it has been populated; and that was more than 100 years ago!)

      For now at least, too many Chinese only know the BS put out by their own government. Herbert Hu, quite frankly, can either get a clue, or go to hell, or both; Debian doesn't need this kind of ignorance.

    8. Re:Sorry, China by MrLint · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree with this sentiment. However i'd like to add a caveat. We are all aware of how history is re-written and adjusted by the powers in charge, and this may well be more of that. However, on the flip side it is not in the public's best interest to have fact distorted via a public medium. (which i have no idea of what is historical fact in this dispute).

      For instance, there continue to be groups who claim the holocaust never happened. This opinion may be censored by a government, and the mere cat it is censored does not make it true.

      I suppose the moral here is caveat emptor, watch out who you are buying your truth from.

    9. Re:Sorry, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      1. Isn't that the same reasoning behing the Iraqi tortures? "... but when Sadam ruled them, they were tortured even harder!"

      And actually, no, it is not all good. But I'm waiting for postings about the continuous lies of the U.S. goverment. About the entire fraud that is their foreign policy, supporting a country such as Israel which kills and destroys with U.S. payed and manufactured weapons while claiming to be a neutral referee in the conflict.
      The fact that the US goverment brings down goverments and destroys entire countries for weapons of mass destruction while they know Israel has 'em in huge amounts.
      The fact that although this war was about the so called proven connection between Sadam and Bin Laden, about weapons of mass destruction, about liberating them from torture and about giving the people a real democracy. Now, they're dead silent about the connection, about the weapons, they are torturing them theirselves and their goverment is selected by the US and has bonds with the FBI and CIA.

      The US is building the Forth Reich and aparantly, other then the Arabs nobody seems to care.

      2. Changing history? To point of the post was the banning of a video game. Not the changing of history. And actually, showing fictional movies which constantly charactarize a certain race of people as being evil to the bone, does actually influence people. It's just a certain form of more subtle (or even hidden) propaganda. The reason those Arabs were tortured has everything to do with the fact that Arabs countries are being stamped as "the axis of all evil".
      Furthermore, it is not just fictional movies, but also movies which are supposed to have a historical base. Changing that historical base in your nations advantage is actually making your people believe a distorted history (or even just plain lies).

      And furthermore, it's your good right to think I'm stupid, but imho it does show your lack of actual counterarguments.

    10. Re:Sorry, China by lemox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a little more to it than that. Originally, Taiwan had the Chinese flag and was listed as a "Republic of China", which, as it stands, is the ISO-UN nomenclature of the country. I don't know about Xu, but many of the arguments against changing the flag was that Debian was essentially breaking a standard for political reasons (i.e. the independance of Taiwan). While many non-chinese would think that was the right course of action, the fact of the matter is that other people brought politics into something that didn't really need it. If someone wanted the flag changed, they should look into changing the standard, not changing their individual piece of software.

      Oh yeah, and 'chinaman' is a little 19th century, donchathink?

      --

      "We obviously need a new moderation category: (-1, Woo-fucking-hoo)" --Mr. AC

    11. Re:Sorry, China by HiThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you wish to follow that line of "property ownership", the US bought much of the land claimed by Mexico from the French. Now if you'd said "around a third" then I'd agree.

      OTOH, what gave either the French or the Mexican govt. the right to claim that land? In the case of the French it wasn't even adverse possession, merely that somebody marked it out on a map and claimed it. (I don't think that the French even knew that the Russians were claiming the same land.)

      Now if the Mexican govt. were considered successors in interest to the Aztecs then they could properly claim land up as far as New England... but typically aboriginal claimants were given the short shrift, when they were lucky.

      Still, none of this conflicts with the claim that most of China was originally sovereign countries. In fact, that tended to happen periodicly even after the Emperors appeared. Under a weak emperor the country would fall apart, and the districts at the edges would go their own ways. Sometimes it would get so bad that even provinces close to Beiging would declare their independance. Then a rising Emperor would claim the old provinces, and reclaim them using some combination of diplomacy and military might. Most other countries don't have a long enough history of being the same country to show the same effects, but you can see it in action if you look carefully. (China has more definite borders than most countries. The mountains on two sides, the ocean on another, and a desert on the remaining one.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    12. Re:Sorry, China by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 2, Informative

      1. Isn't that the same reasoning behing the Iraqi tortures? "... but when Sadam ruled them, they were tortured even harder!

      That is similarly illogical thinking. That is EXACTLY what I was accusing you of doing, thank you. If you think that the above statement is absurd (it is!) then why are you doing the same thing?

      And furthermore, it's your good right to think I'm stupid, but imho it does show your lack of actual counterarguments.

      No, it does not. Your arguments are filled with pointless diatribe and hyperbole. Furthermore, a key point you brought up in your response (that this article is about banning a video game) is destructive to the entire argument you are trying to make (i.e. that US publications only criticize other countries' governments)

      - Yes, this post is about banning a video game. That is why it is on Slashdot. You can find TONS of anti-war, anti-US articles written by *gasp* US newspapers and online publications. These are NOT on Slashdot right now because of Slashdot's focus on technology and law. Typical anti-US articles on Slashdot focus on these two key areas, which in most cases involve complaints about government payoffs from entertainment conglomerates, the DMCA, the Patriot Act, etc.

      By the way, Slashdot is not afilliated with the US government and as stated above is often extremely critical of that government. Why is it hypocritical for them to publish an article about another nation's abuse of the law in what is certainly their usual domain?

      As for your last paragraph, I am at a loss for words trying to imagine in what way you think that Hollywood movies designed for entertainment can be validly compared to direct government alteration of history. Yes, China altered the history of the region, but not by banning a video game. I never said that. They banned the video game because it conflicts with the way in which they already altered history. Do you suppose that the US government has an official version of history and that no one is allowed to deviate from it in entertainment products? Because that is what we are discussing with China here.

    13. Re:Sorry, China by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      who said that he was american?

    14. Re:Sorry, China by localman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I am at a loss for words trying to imagine in what way you think that Hollywood movies designed for entertainment can be validly compared to direct government alteration of history.

      And I'm at a loss trying to imagine how you could find successful alteration of history different whether it's done by a government or a corporation. Corporations are the new government, my friend.

      Many of your other points are valid, though.

      Cheers.

    15. Re:Sorry, China by paranerd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It doesn't matter what the Chinese people claim, think, or want. What matters is what the people who live in those territories claim, think, and want.

      I live in Michigan. By and large everyone in Michigan feels like an American. Many people who live in Alaska don't feel American, don't want to be American, are upset that they were never given the choice to become, or not become, Americans. It doesn't matter what I as a Michiganian think about Alaska being part of the US. What does matter is what do Alaskans as a majority think.

    16. Re:Sorry, China by amber_of_luxor · · Score: 2, Informative

      As for your last paragraph, I am at a loss for words trying to imagine in what way you think that Hollywood movies designed for entertainment can be validly compared to direct government alteration of history.

      Two Words: The Blacklist

      Or did you never read anything about the McCarthy years, and what filmakers in Hollywood could, or could not portray in their films?

      Amber

      --
      Wind Beneath Thy Wings
    17. Re:Sorry, China by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Funny
      Sigh, another historically ignorant American.

      Sigh, another pompous self-important, non0american know-it-all...

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    18. Re:Sorry, China by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 2, Interesting

      See, that's just it - where's the objectivity here? Fox News is one outlet. One very, very conservative outlet. There are plenty of other outlets for more liberal news, but it seems as if a lot of people honestly believe that the voice (whatever voice that may be) that they agree with the least is somehow the only voice out there.

      I'm not actually that big of a conservative myself, so let's flip this around - the right likes to use the phrase "the liberal media" fairly frequently. They're falling victim to the same myth you guys seem to be - a myopic assumption that the media that pushes their buttons and makes them angry is the only media that exists.

    19. Re:Sorry, China by phrasebook · · Score: 3, Informative

      Glad Herbert Xu quit Debian - the project doesn't need someone like that.

      Look at this posting to see what his real attitude is:

      http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-boot@lists.de bi an.org/msg43619.html

      He says: "Who cares? It'd be much better if you [Taiwanese] didn't use Debian at all.". Idiot.

    20. Re:Sorry, China by Synic · · Score: 3, Informative

      He's awfully "nationalistic" for China for someone who is living in Australia of all places. What a hypocrite.

    21. Re:Sorry, China by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's funny, the US has controlled its chunk of North America for only about 200 years of the thousands of years it was populated, too.

    22. Re:Sorry, China by Stargoat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Formosa was the Japanese name for the island.

      As for the native Taiwanese, there is a group called the Benshengren, who are more or less native. Then, there is a another group called Hakka that moved over about 700 years ago. After that, in the past 100 years, the mainlanders came over, particularly with the KMT.

      As for comparing Chinese and Western freedoms, there is no comparison. I know fools like the previous poster go on about how bad it is in the west, but that's bullshit.

      In mainland China, it is quite accepted to punish individuals families for collective punishment. The crimes of a a few will be punished with collective economic punishment. Sons are punished for the actions of fathers. Families are destroyed for their ancestor's hard work. Knowledge and truth is banned.

      The Chinese who revolt are slaughtered. What the Japanese did to the Chinese is peanuts compared to the auto-genocide that Mao and company committed agains the Chinese, what Deng did in Tiananmen and elsewhere, or what goes on all over on a small scale today.

      As for better than 1976, that's true and that's false. China has a much stronger military then it did 30 years ago. It is capable of reaking much more havok. The Chinese have proven their violence in the past.

      In the past 60 years, they have been at war with Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, and South Korea. They have been in a quasi-war with Russia since Stalin died. The Chinese attack their Muslim population and are attempting to destroy them.

      No, there is little good coming from China at present. The Chinese themselves are responsible for the situation as well. They are the ones threatening world peace over a small democracy several miles off their coast. The attitude is a willingness to destroy the happy people of Taiwan in exchange for the destruction of the siland is gladly accepted by the Communist leaders. The threat of the US Seventh Fleet, and American Ballistic Missiles, is all that defends the freedom loving people of Taiwan. Were it not for the nuclear weapons of the US, China would long ago have destroyed that freedom loving island.

      There is no excuse for the fascist power that China has become. None. The excuse that they are improving is not true. There is no desire for change by the corrupt Communist leaders. A revolution is the only possibility of success and freedom for the people of the mainland.

      No, the people of China deserve better than to be told, "Look at how much your government has changed." To say otherwise demeans their trials. Democracy and freedom are all peoples' unalienable rights, even if they live in a country of 1.3 billion.

      --
      Hoist Number One and Number Six.
  2. Maybe they just don't like the truth... by seanmcelroy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Tibet *was* an independent sovereign nation before China took it over. Just because you don't like being known as a bully doesn't mean you aren't one.

    --
    Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. -Thomas Cardinal Wolsey
    1. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by All_Star25 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia." Reminiscent of 1984, no? Everything upsets the Chinese government anyway. Remember Falun Gong? Remember Tiananmen Square in 1989? This is nothing particularly new.

    2. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by thbarnes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The concept of a nation-state was very new to Central and South Asia at the time Tibet was invaded. To classify it as part of China would be wrong yes, but to classify it as a sovereign nation in the modern sense of the word would be wrong too. Perhaps 'kingdom' would be a better word. While I agree that Tibet deserves greater autonomy due to it's unique historical, cultural, and religous background, do be aware that you are imposing on the situation your own cultural assumptions about what dictates a nation.

    3. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by hey! · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The source of China's claim to Tibet is actually pretty bizarre. During the nomad/warrior phase of Tibet's history, they exacted as tribute, an Chinese imperial princess. Later, when Tibet was less formidable,this became a source of imperial claims by China of Tibet. This was subsequently picked up by the Communists in the modern era.

      This is just another example of how a tenuous claim gets respect just by being repeated long enough. However, as an American I'm hardly in a position to criticize China, since a lot of our property was stolen from our Indians through treaty violations.

      The real reason for Tibet to become autonomous would be that most of the people born there want independence.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by king-manic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps. But if you tell it long enough, and object to the truth long enough. Eventually you'll persevere. Truth is subjective. Although we love to think of it as absolute, someone has to define it. If there is no "opposing truth", then the remaining "truth" is the truth.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    5. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Tibet *was* an independent sovereign nation before China took it over. Just because you don't like being known as a bully doesn't mean you aren't one.

      Heh. Perhaps you haven't had the pleasure of reading George Orwell's 1984, in which Orwell vividly describes the state of the world in a future he feared. In 1984, the government rewrites history on a daily basis. This could be something small, like modifying what Big Brother said about an individual some months ago. Or it could be something big, like convincing the world that one country had always been their ally, while another had always been their enemy; especially when the opposite had been true the day before.

      This might seem crazy when you read it in a book, but these things happen all the time in real life, even here in the United States. For example, the ACLU, the so-called American Civil Liberties Union, is currently pursuing legal action against the County of Los Angeles because that county's seal includes a small image of a Christian cross, symbolizing the Mission that was the first settlement in the area. This is a form of rewriting history, as is the removal of Paul Revere from children's history books, to be replaced with some female who apparently did something similar, to be "politically correct." Yes, this has already been done in many schools.

      When China decides that it doesn't like certain things, it will talk about them as if they did not exist. I wouldn't be surprised if the entire education system there teaches people things that are wrong, so when the Chinese people hear something like this, they think it's the truth, and that Tibet was never owned by anybody else.

      BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.

      War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.

    6. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Insightful

      History is written by the winners.

      If we let China win, then Tibet will have always been part of China as they say. And anyone who says otherwise is simply some crazy hippie talking about silly conspiracy theories.

      Of course it looks like the "conservatives" (and I use that term loosely because there is nothing conservative about this policy) are willing to ignore China's expansionism. Tibet and Taiwan are to be gobbled up to make China a happy trading partner.

      What ever happen to real conservatives who resisted communist expansionism at every step? How did we decide that Russia expanding into eastern europe was not okay. But China expanding into asia is not okay.

      I guess we lost our guts and our heads after the war protesters defeated the US during the Vietnam war.

      If China can go around taking over nations, why can't we? Brazil looks pretty promising, they are beating the US in beef and soybean exports. Their economy got turned around in the 90s and isn't fighting massive inflation anymore. Since Brazil is part of South America and the US refers to itself as America that logically means that Brazil is part of the US and not a sovereign nations. It all makes sense now.

      But first we have to expand into Canada and Mexico to get the resources necessary to take *back* Brazil.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    7. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by eric76 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What? Do you have cites to back up that claim?

      Maybe you mean something like in exchanging diplomats?

      I think that Tibet was a very secluded area that rarely allowed any outsiders in. The last thing they would have wanted was to exchange diplomats or have foreign embassies present. So from that point of view, you might be technically correct, but only technically correct.

      But in fact, Tibet was recognized as an independent country. If a mountaineer wanted permission to climb Everest from the north, he needed Tibet's permission, not China's. And that permission was not often given.

      China's claim to Tibet, as far as I understand, is that a Chinese baby was taken to Tibet to become the Dalai Lama at one point.

    8. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by ndpatel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      while i don't know about the case against LA county, don't be stupid and compare the ACLU to Big Brother.

      in 1984, Big Brother is the government. the ACLU is an organization comprised of people who don't want the government to trample civil liberties.

      say what you want about the goals and the methodologies of the ACLU, but that's a huge distinction.

      as for paul revere, your argument exactly supports his removal and the reinsertion of "some woman who apparently did something similar": if he didn't do what we've always taught and someone else did, it is improper historical revisionism that deleted her and credited him.

      --
      london is drowning and i live by river
    9. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by HiThere · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you check your history, Paul Revere wasn't very significant. The credit should have been given to William Dawes. But Longfellow thought that Paul Revere sounded better in his poem. (Or perhaps he got a good deal on some silverware, if he'd only include a plug? No evidence either way as far as I know.)

      That being so, why not replace him by someone else of a group that has historically been slighted? Makes sense to me...as long as they don't go around suppressing Longfellow.

      "On the 14th of April in '75
      Hardly a man is now alive
      Who remembers that famous day and year
      Of the midnight ride of ????"

      William Dawes just doesn't fit. What's the lady's name?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by Thedalek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Remember Falun Gong?

      Why yes, as a matter of fact, I do. They're the ones who believe that there is literally a tiny little wheel which contains a model of the universe and which is located in their abdomen. Many Falun Gong followers have injured and/or killed themselves trying to perform exploratory surgery to see this wheel. This sort of thing is cause for concern, to be sure.

      What's more, it becomes clear upon reading any significant amount of literature relating to the group (be it for or against) that the leader, Li Hongzhi is either a habitual user of some really trippy drugs, a charlatan, or about as sane as a sackful of wet squirrels.

      However, the level of reaction on the Chinese government's part is foaming-at-the-mouth barbaric. The best way to keep people from revolting is to not let them know they're being opressed, and the Chinese government seems to be going out of their way to let the people know "We're doing this to demoralize you."

      --
      Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
    11. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the so-called American Civil Liberties Union, is currently pursuing legal action against the County of Los Angeles because that county's seal includes a small image of a Christian cross, symbolizing the Mission that was the first settlement in the area. This is a form of rewriting history

      By that same logic, inserting "under God" into the pledge of allegiance during the middle of the 20th century was also "a form of rewriting history" since it is in direct contradiction with the deist beliefs held by many of the founding fathers and just about all of the prominent ones.

      Any chance you are in favor of correcting that error? Or is "re-writing history" and all this talk of Big Brother just rationalization for your own particular flavor of Big Brother.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    12. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by vaccum+pony · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If China can go around taking over nations, why can't we?
      You may have heard of a small country in the Middle East, goes by the name of Iraq...
    13. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by LarsWestergren · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Hi, I've read 1984 many times. I find it fascinating that you chose ACLU to illustrate the BB concept - a case where a minor organisation openly fought against something they dislike (for right or wrong) when you have a government with the aide of a lapdog media that tries to rewrite and erase history basically on a daily basis, EXACTLY as Orwell described it:

      Cleansing Time Magazine

      As paper libraries and archives give way to electronic data collections, history is becoming ever more frail. A composition instructor at the University of California at Irvine got a disturbing email from a friend who was searching Time magazine's digital archives looking for a certain article written by George Bush Senior and his Defense Secretary, Brent Scowcroft. In that article, the two men purportedly explained why they decided not to occupy Iraq in 1991. Their reason was that such an action would have exceeded the UN's mandate to remove Iraq from Kuwait , and would have destroyed the precedent of an international response to aggression. They went on to argue, in the March 2, 1998 article, had they chosen to occupy Iraq in 1991, the US would probably still be occupying a bitterly hostile land.

      The article, in today's light, seems like a clear rebuff to junior's invasion. But the article is gone. It's no longer in Time's digital archives - as if it never existed. The Irvine instructor decided to charge her students with the task of verifying the existence or nonexistence of the article. As it turned out, the article was in fact real, and was still archived by a number of subscription-accessed library research databases - but it was no longer in the Time archives. Interestingly, none of her digital-age students thought to look for the paper copy of the magazine in the library. The instructor did, finding not only the missing article, but also finding that editors changed the titles on many of the articles remaining in the Time archives.

      Time's post-facto editing is especially disturbing since it shakes the very foundation of library sciences. An archive is a collection of past works. By definition it must be left intact. Archive managers have no right to edit history. In this case, Time blew their chance to censor this story in 1998.


      To paraphrase some other cases:

      "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! THE WAR IS OVER!" "Um, actually, the soldiers on the ship printed up that banner and hung it behind us as a total surpise! We knew *nothing* about it."

      "Saddam was behind 9/11, that is why we invade!"
      "We invade because we have evidence that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and threatens the world."
      "We invade because he has the *capability* to create WMD, also, we never said anything about an imminent threat or him having WMD right now, so shut up!"
      "We invaded to remove a vicious dictator and bring democracy to Iraq! If you recall something else your memory is defective!"

      "The liberal cowards in the CIA who tries to dissuade us from going to war can be safely ignored."
      "Oh no! The CIA betrayed us, they didn't tell us how dangerous going to war would be! Everyone, look how corrupt and incompetent the CIA is!"

      And the good oldies -
      "Bush has a spotless history!"
      "Rumsfelt had NOTHING to do with supporting Saddam during the Reagan administration and absolutely did not shake his hand on that picture!"
      "We did NOT train and financially support the Taliban and Usama bin-Laden to fight the commies during the cold war, and we should ignore weeping liberals who say today that we shouldn't support brutal dictatorships because these dictatorships claim to fight terrorism! God bless America!"

      The list is basically endless....:
      http://mediastudy.com/articles/av12-11-03.html
      http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0206-02.htm
      http://www.dunedinmethodist.org.nz/just/orwl.html
      --

      Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die

    14. Re:Maybe they just don't like the truth... by UserGoogol · · Score: 2, Insightful

      RRrrghhhhh... please don't compare "political correctness" with Orwellianism. The paralells exist, but... no, you're wrong.

      City banners are not meant to be static. Changing banners so as to have the government not endorse the Christian religion (which is an important part of the seperation of Church and State) does not, in any way shape or form, rewrite history. We're not saying the town wasn't founded by missionaries.

      Anyway, this seal is more than just saying "oh, we were founded by missionaries." The portion in question consists of a GLOWING crucifix floating above a church. The glowing of the crucifix clearly implies holiness, and that means that the banner endorses Christianity as true, something which states are forbidden from doing, due to the first amendment in conjuction with the fourteenth.

      It's not rewriting history.

      And replacing mentions of Paul Revere with mentions of some lady who did the same exact thing doesn't rewrite history. It tells the truth, just a different part of the truth.

      There's nothing wrong with rewriting history books per se. There's so much history, and our knowledge of it is constantly growing, of course books are going to change now and then. There's nothing wrong with this. Perhaps Abigail Adams is a better example of history than Paul Revere. So what? What's Orwellian and wrong is with rewriting history books to present false information.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
  3. "severely distort historical facts"? by Abjifyicious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, I hope they never get their hands on Civilization...

  4. Well jeez... by Cyno01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hope they dont see this.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    1. Re:Well jeez... by N1KO · · Score: 3, Funny

      So the Australians didn't invent camping?

    2. Re:Well jeez... by Total_Wimp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was in the US Army in West Germany in '85 guarding the East German border. Some German friends brought over Risk and we played a little. They explained to us that due to sensitivity about their Nazi past, in German Risk you don't 'conquer' the world, you 'liberate' it. My friends at the time indicated that this was a matter of German law, but I don't know if that was true or not. At the time I thought it was funny, but now I don't think I'd find such a law to be very funny anymore.

      TW

  5. China censors people.... by Mad_Rain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... And this surprises anyone because...?

    I admit, that this takes it to a new extreme though - what's next, censoring science fiction because the physics in the book violate the sci-fi laws that the government approved of?

    I wonder if because the game is banned, will it push it underground, and make it more popular. (In that case, start hosting torrent files, people! ;) )

    --
    "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
    1. Re:China censors people.... by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Informative
      "He [Solomon] made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it"

      It says "circular", not "perfect circle".

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    2. Re:China censors people.... by bigdavex · · Score: 3, Funny

      "He [Solomon] made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it"

      It says "circular", not "perfect circle".

      If I can add to that, I don't see a reason to think that the original diameter is intended to express more than one significant digit.
      --
      -Dave
  6. Re:The problem is... by Captain+Segfault · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Capitalism has little to do with freedom. The issue here is not one of capitalism, but one of freedom of speech.

  7. Wait 'til the Committee gets a hold of Risk by line.at.infinity · · Score: 2, Funny

    their collective heads will explode.

  8. repressing the truth by line.at.infinity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's basicallly what I've been telling to Japan, but they won't heed my warnings about Godzilla even though Sim City clearly proves their existance!

    1. Re:repressing the truth by Obfiscator · · Score: 2, Insightful
      People mod "Insightful" because "Funny" doesn't give any karma.

      At least, that's why I'm assuming it was done. Sometimes mods just don't make any sense.

      --
      "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." -Indiana Jones
    2. Re:repressing the truth by cgenman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know whether to mod that "Insightful" or "Funny."

  9. Ancient Chinese secret... by OneFootIn · · Score: 5, Funny

    To really piss them off, send them a copy of Shadow Warrior.

  10. Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocide by Nova+Express · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you had invaded a country, committed genocide against it's people, done all you can to stamp out their indigenous culture (one commentator put it "Imagine if the Nazis upon invading France had pulled down every church except Norte Dame, and burned and looted every museum except the Louvre. That's what China did in Tibet."), colonized it and incorported it into your own nation, I'm sure you'd want to repress all mention of it as well.

    Unfortunately, I don't have good hard figures on the death toll from China's genocide in Tibet (as opposed to the genocide committed against ethnic Chinese during the great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, estimates for which range between 30-60 million), and Rummel doesn't have an seperate index entry for Tibet in Death by Goverment. Here's a protest poster that claims 1.2 million Tibetans have died as the results of China's occupation. We probably won't know the real number until (like the Soviet Union) after China is liberated from Communism at some future date.

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

  11. Then why.... by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 3, Insightful

    did Tibet have to be "taken over" if it wasn't a sovereign nation?

  12. Re:The problem is... by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    China is already a thoroughly capitalist country-- that is, a state capitalist country, in which the whole country is basically run for the profit of the state-owned industry. It is already quite removed from the old Soviet system, and is largely devoid of the traditional Maoist rhetoric about the dictatorship of the proletariat et al. They also seem to be moving fairly rapidly (by Chinese standards) in the direction of a more traditionally capitalist economy, with more privately-owned companies and foreign investment. Of course, that hasn't really resulted in a decrease in the state authority over speech, the press, etc.; it's just that now the state uses its authority to ensure corporate profits rather than the victory of the workers' revolution.

    There is a sense in which China is taking a realistic road: they realized decades ago that the Soviet-style command economy wasn't going to get them anywhere, but they were also keen enough to realize that rapid reforms like glasnost and perestroika led to the sudden decline of the Soviet state before a stable alternative economy could be developed, with the resulting economic hardships, explosion in organized crime, and civil unrest. So in a sense they're taking a gradual course out of traditional Communism to avoid the problems of Gorbachev. On the other hand, those in charge of the state-run industries aren't just going to give up that power, so they want to insure that in the post-Communist economy they're still the majority shareholders, so to speak.

    --

    I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
  13. Let's run a little test.... by MagicDude · · Score: 4, Funny

    If I post "CHINA SUCKS!!", how long do you think it will be before the Ministry's Game Products Censorship Committee bans slashdot as a violation of Internet service regulations??

    1. Re:Let's run a little test.... by thbarnes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you use your real name, it won't be long until China will require you to go through a military background check to get a visa to visit. Believe me, it happened to me.

    2. Re:Let's run a little test.... by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Having been to China, I find that many of the internet sites which are supposedly banned actually work just fine. (BBC Google etc.)

      Google is redirected to a chinese google but google.ca (top 15 sites in the world) works just fine.

      So either their censorship isn't working or we are getting flummoxed.

  14. Re:understand by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Informative
    bottom line, i don't agree with it, but it isn't ridiculous, they do have a point.

    It IS ridiculous, because they complain that: 'Moreover, "Manchuria", "West Xinjiang", and "Tibet" appeared as independent sovereign countries in the maps of the game. In addition, it even included China's Taiwan province as the territory of Japan at the beginning of the game."

    Well, Taiwan WAS a Japanese colony in 1936, (following the 1894 Sino-Japanese war Taiwan was ceded to the Japanese) and Tibet WAS independent till 1959 when China invaded it.

  15. Western parallels... by Henrik+S.+Hansen · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Karma to burn, but I need to vent. Let's go.

    Although this is not banning or censoring, strictly speaking, the Bush administration and the corporate media is not much better than its Chinese equivalents.

    They distorted the facts about the real reason for the Iraqi war -- the claim that there were WMD were at best speculative, and at worst plain lies.

    The US (and European - the Danish, at least) mainstream media have been very US-friendly and projected into most people the sense that somehow, the war was 'OK', even though there were no WMD, and therefore no valid reason (besides money, oil, power, and influence) to invade a sovereign nation.

    The US surely can't point fingers at China for not upholding the basic human rights. The imprisonment of many people in Guantanamo Bay with no trial, no evidence, and for basically no real reason other than show the right-wing voters (who sadly seems to be the majority of US voters) that "we're doing something about terrorism".

    As a Dane, it's just so sad to see how the Danish government is following the US lead in practically everything. "Oh, we'd sure like the Danish prisoners out of Guantanamo Bay, but if we cannot, they probably deserve to be there anyway. And we sure don't give a flying fuck about any other prisoners than the Danish."

    1. Re:Western parallels... by RickHunter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So because a government does something wrong, the people of the nation it governs, even those that disagree with its actions, cannot speak out against other countries doing the same thing? Even if they also speak out against their government doing it?

    2. Re:Western parallels... by NineNine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, they found that stuff over a year after the war started, so more than likely, it was brought in after the fact, and the quantities that were found were *trace* amounts that somebody probably made in their basement. Not enough reason to bomb the living fuck out of a country, in my opinion.

    3. Re:Western parallels... by garyok · · Score: 3, Insightful
      And we didn't "bomb the fuck" out of the country. The US knew they would have to rebuild the craphole country and minimized damange to infrastructure.

      1. Alliance forces bombed, and continue to bomb, the fuck out of Iraq. Do you seriously think that all the improvised explosives detonated so far in Iraq have done as much damage and caused as much loss of life as Alliance high explosives?

      2. The money to rebuild Iraq is being paid for from their own oil revenues. The cost to repair the damaged Iraqi infrastructure after GWI, sanctions, and GWII is, IIRC, about $36billion. Their oil reserves are about $30billion. And with more being money lost in the graft and corruption endemic in contracts with US corporations, signed without the Iraqi people's ratification, they're in a hole so deep that they'll be lucky if their grandchildren see daylight.

      It might be easier for a citizen of the United States of America to understand the 'insurgents' actions in these term: the Iraqis are being taxed without representation by a colonial power. Their actions are no more or less than the actions of your own founding fathers in response to equally, if not more, provactive injury.

      The rest of the world doesn't get pissed off by Americans because the have so much, or they waste so much - it's because they tend to be too dumb to realise what tremendous two-faced assholes they can be, and that saying sorry later doesn't actually fix dead people now.

      --
      One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors - Plato
    4. Re:Western parallels... by praksys · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The US (the people and the government) is pretty sensitive to critism.

      I'm not American, but I have been living in the US for some years now. I don't particularly like living here, and I intend to leave when I am finished with my studies. That said I have noticed two things since moving here...

      (1) Americans, and especially the American press, are pathologically self-critical. Every problem in the entire world is viewed as somehow the result of either US action or inaction. I think this is partly a result of the American tendancy to view the US as the center of the world.

      (2) When non-Americans, or at least people who have never lived here, criticise the US they usually display a stunning degree of ignorance about what the US is like, what it has done, and why. Of course Americans who have never lived abroard also display a stunning degree of ignorance about the rest of the world. But there is a difference. Most Americans are aware of their own ignorance about the rest of the world, where as the rest of the world seems to think that it knows America. I think that this is probably because of the dominance of American media. People see a lot of the fictional America that exists in TV shows and movies, and they confuse that with the non-fictional America.

      Anyway, speculation aside, I don't think Americans are overly sensitive to criticism. But a lot of them are sick of the BS, totally-divorced-from-reality, criticism that they hear from people outside of the US.

    5. Re:Western parallels... by the+gnat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But a lot of them are sick of the BS, totally-divorced-from-reality, criticism that they hear from people outside of the US.

      THANK YOU. I've been trying to say this for years. What's worse is that I've known foreigners living in the US who are just as strident and ignorant in their criticisms. They're also huge consumers of US culture, technology, and education, which makes me suspect more than a little bit of hypocritical nationalism at work.

      The thing that really galls me is the condescending attitude most assume when I try to argue with them. They immediately decide that I must be another ignorant American and that it's their duty to educate me about the world. Most of the time this consists of regurgitating random facts that I already read about in American media, many of which are of dubious veracity. If you read nothing but The Guardian and Noam Chomsky, you're just as ill-informed as some Texan listening to Rush and watching Fox News.

  16. not surprising by btharris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    China bans games (and other things) all the time. Command & Conquer Generals was banned for how it portrayed the Chinese. When I played c&c generals, I didn't expect the screwy accents and "propaganda center" to necessarily agree with the Chinese people, much less the Chinese government. In defense of c&c, though, after playing it I did have a greater realization of the threat terrorism could have on China due to geography. The U.S. has it much easier being isolated between two great oceans.

    Anyway, the annexation/aquisition/takeover/whatever of Tibet has been a controversy (for some) over recent years. So, it doesn't surprise me that "territorial integrity" is an excuse they cited. They can be picky about how you draw their borders.

    A more fundamental question, though, is how serious people take this. It's just a game. Who actually believes what they see in video games?

  17. ++ungood by t_allardyce · · Score: 4, Funny

    Banned is so in. If you get your game, film, book, music, t-shirt or pretty much anything you can banned then everyone will want it. Even if you cant get it banned, just get it disliked by some authority and you've got a sure winner, infact even the people who hate it will want to see what all the fuss is about! Just some recent examples:

    The Passion of the Christ (have you seen it?)
    GTA (Australia, germany, blood-patch?)
    Michael Moore films (Always winning Oscars)
    Teenage Sex (Its all about Bush!)
    CSS t-shirts (ok no-one outside slashdot cares but still)
    Nick-Berg video (No-one gave a url... 3 days later everyone had it)

    and ofcourse (see sig) the Vanunu interview by the BBC which has been smuggled out of Israel and gets aired tomorrow (like totally in your face sharon!)

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  18. Re:Weak by linzeal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When will we see a real democracy emerge from the ruins of this wretched shell of a communist regime? Do you still think you will see 1 billion more people free in your lifetime? Will it be a bloody revolution or a revolution of roses?

  19. This is news? by d474 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So the Chinese government is censoring free speech? Do you support that, or not?

    Everytime you go to Walmart, Target, and other "Made in China" clearing houses, you are supporting China, and placing another fatal blow to locally owned American small business.

    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor.
  20. Re:understand by fantastic+max · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But it is inaccurate. This is communst dogma at it's height and it's an ego trip about geopgraphy. Tibet had been a long-standing independent tributary to imperial China and was not a true part of China until the reds forced it into becoming a secular province in the 50s and kidnapped their second highest religious leader. And at the time of the Tibetan takeover, let's remember that the Republic of China was internationally recognized as China, not the People's Republic of China until the 70s. It's completely inaccurate to leave Manchuria out as a separate entity (sovereignty is up in the air though) because Japan occupied most of northeastern China and did in fact set up the puppet state of The Empire of Manchuria. So I can't see how you got a +5 insightful by not knowing any of the history that the evil communist Chinese government are supposedly trying to rewrite.

  21. Re:Interesting double standard by IvyMike · · Score: 5, Insightful
    China is occupying Tibet and the other regions. [...] The list goes on, but not a peep is heard from the Left.

    My hippy neighbor's VW van is literally COVERED with "Free Tibet" stickers. And since the muffler doesn't work for crap, it makes a noise a LOT louder than a mere peep.

  22. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by garroo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >i>"If you had invaded a country, committed genocide against it's people, done all you can to stamp out their indigenous culture ... ...colonized it and incorported it into your own nation, I'm sure you'd want to repress all mention of it as well."

    You mean like every stolen land-based "state" in the western hemisphere, such as the USA, which gave aborignals disease infested blankets, hunted and killed with efficiency, and then moved them onto reservations of mostly useless land far away from their original farming/hunting grounds?

    Hmmm sounds mighty familiar to me. Hell, the US Supreme court even ruled way back that the dispossession of Cherokee and other aboriginal nations was illegal, according to law, but the US just decided to send the army and IGNORE> their own courts/laws (ie: consititution)

    (see a description here: http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/immig/native_ american2.html).

    Nobody much wants to hear about that, do they? Nor do you hear anyone (well, except proud newfoundlanders) talk about how the Beothuks were exterminated in Canada....

    or how current government policies of "racial quantum (purity) assessment" allows the government to say who IS and ISN'T Aboriginal, thereby stripping them of their last shred of power: The right to self identify and gather as a nation. It also has the great effect of pitting "status" Indians with their 'on the dole' rights against "non-status" who often seek some of those rights, but are denied due to shrinking government handouts.

    Pretty world we live in here in the west, eh? Nope, nobody being colonized HERE. Oh, right, we just call it immigration.

    --
    Oh my gawd, they killed kenny's mod points!!!!
  23. Re:Remember Guatanmo Bay and Abu Gharib ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, Tibet is just a misunderstanding.

    And those religions that China keeps persecuting? Yes, just a difference of opinion.

  24. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 4, Interesting

    one commentator put it "Imagine if the Nazis upon invading France had pulled down every church except Norte Dame, and burned and looted every museum except the Louvre. That's what China did in Tibet."

    He forgot "forcibly sterilized", "imprisoned & tortured clergy", etc. but I guess the guy didn't have a spare half hour to extend his analogy. The Chinese gov't = teh suck. Evil, hypocritical old men. Thank god they're our allies (mostly).

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  25. Re:Interesting double standard by HungWeiLo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Free Tibet" sticker owners are nothing but bandwagoners. Do you see stickers about "Free Algerians who got their heads cut off by extremists" or "Free [insert oppressed African minority group]"? The only reason the "Free Tibet" sticker is on is because some celebrities endorsed it. Nothing more. Some people go a little further and deify the Dalai Lama as some saviour of human rights in Tibet. What a crock. This is the same guy who at one time ran a theocracy in Tibet (and sicced scorpions on people who didn't pay their taxes on time) - yes, the same guy who got the obviously politically motivated Nobel Peace Prize. History has repeatedly shown that the whole "my enemy's enemy is my friend" thing usually doesn't work out too well in the end.

    Well, seriously, the damage has been done a long time ago. Tibet has been continuously ruled by China (via the Qing Dynasty) for several hundreds years prior. Waiting another few more years before the Communist Party disintegrates in the very near future won't be too bad. The rising Chinese middle class will inevitably change things in that region - all for the better.

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  26. Re:understand by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, Taiwan WAS a Japanese colony in 1936, (following the 1894 Sino-Japanese war Taiwan was ceded to the Japanese) and Tibet WAS independent till 1959 when China invaded it.

    You are missing the point. Leftists regimes really think that they have the right to dictate history and the "official version" of facts. The ChiComs really love to cry about the Rape of Nanking but seem to forget that Maoists murdered millions of their own people too.
    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  27. In Good Company by Jameth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nice to see they are keeping up on their censorship of games. They're in good company, what with Wolfenstein still being illegal in Germany.

  28. It's very fashionable... by rcs1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...to point to the West's (undoubted) human right failures, and say "we are no better than they." Guantanemo Bay is just one example; you could add the goings on at the prison in Iraq, or the temporary "extradition" of terror suspects to regimes like Saudi Arabia, who do torturing for the US government.

    No doubt, Western governments (not even European ones ;-)) are far from perfect. And groups like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International point to US and European shortcomings on a regular basis.

    But to pretend this somehow means that the US is no better than Nazi Germany, Communist China, or Theologist Iran is absurd and disturbing.

    In the US, as in Europe, the people can choose "regime change" every five years, if they don't like the government. Anyone (practically) can stand for government, even former wresters and movie starts. There are a range of different political parties, and even when they do not win power, they could, and they help shape the agenda.

    Is that true of China? Or Iran?

    In the West, women generally have equal rights to men; whites to blacks; and jews to Muslims.

    In Saudi Arabia, and much of the Middle East, your rights are severely curtailed, or practically non-existent, if you fail to have the "right" charectaristics.

    Best of all: in the West we have a (basically) free press, and freedom of expression. You can say whatever you want! It can be disturbing (eulogies to paedophilia, or support of mass-murder), but it exists.

    In China, or Iran, or so many other places, saying the wrong thing lands you in jail.

    Tell me again that the US is just as bad as China. Tell me you would really rather live there. Tell me which of your rights you no longer wish to excercise. Tell me which of my rights you think I don't deserve.

    --
    --- My dad's political betting
  29. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by HeghmoH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference, of course, is that nothing's being banned in the US because it speaks unfavorably of our past. That is not insignificant.

    --
    Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  30. Perhaps for Tibet, but... by Vthornheart · · Score: 5, Informative
    many of those other regions were by no means independant during World War II. Manchuria, for example, was immediately taken by Japan in WWII and became a pseudo-country known as Manchukuo, but was technically a territory of Japan.

    And Xinjiang was *CERTAINLY* not an independant nation at any time, ever. It has always been considered an "autonomous region" along with a great portion of that western side of China, but it is by no means independant. It still functions under the rules and mandates of the Chinese government(s), and has done so for the past 2200 years.

    So I believe that, although their action because of it was a bit extreme, they were at least correct in their reasoning for two of the states. The first one, Tibet, was indeed an independant soverignty until 1950, and so should not have been on that list. (of course, the propaganda surrounding the Tibetan situation with China is such that they would like people to believe otherwise)

    And as a final, humorous note... should the United States censor Risk, that divides our country into five partitions. =)

    --
    -Vendal Thornheart
    1. Re:Perhaps for Tibet, but... by fberry · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know about Xinjiang, but in the game Manchukuo starts as a puppet of Japan. I think the Japanese player can even order their soldiers around.
      So, while on the map they have a border,and their own flag, they are not really an independant nation. China doesn't really have a legitimate complaint about that.

    2. Re:Perhaps for Tibet, but... by Moridineas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And Xinjiang was *CERTAINLY* not an independant nation at any time, ever. It has always been considered an "autonomous region" along with a great portion of that western side of China, but it is by no means independant. It still functions under the rules and mandates of the Chinese government(s), and has done so for the past 2200 years.


      BZZZZ!! Nonsense! Parts of Xinjiang have historically been part of the various chiense kingdoms (since I believe the Han--thus your statement of 2200 years), however you really have to look to the Qing within the past 300 years to see any real control of the area. Check out the location of the Jade Gate, versus say, Kashgar. Kashgar--now there is a Chinese city for you. You only need to look at most of the residents to see how Chinese xinjiang is. Xinjiang's also been ruled by the Uyghurs (the present day residents, Turkic peoples, who the chiense are attempting [and succeeding] to outbreed with MASSIVE population transfers--similarly done in Tibet) In addition, there have been numerous rebellions in the area, and there WAS briefly in the 20th century an independent East Turkestan. IIRC, Xinjiang means new Province, and was only created within the past 200 years (again, by the Qing--the first chinese dynasty to effectively control the area)

      Xinjiang has NOT been part of China for 2200 years. PARTS of it may have been under some relationship with China during some parts of the past 2000 years, but to say it's been part of china for 2000 years is wrong.

    3. Re:Perhaps for Tibet, but... by Arker · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's more complicated in the case of Tibet too.

      Tibet was first unified politically with China in the 13th century, under the Yuan dynasty, by Khublai Khan. Up through the Qing dynasty, it was much more of an semi-autonomous territory than an independent state. The 1911 Constitution which succeeded the Qing claims it as an integral part of China, and thus the Republic of China (aka 'Taiwan') claims it just as the PRC does.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  31. China this, China that by saihung · · Score: 5, Insightful

    China was nearly conquered by Tibet during the Tang dynasty. The Tibetan army stopped miles from the Tang capital, signed a perpetual treaty of friendship with the Chinese, and departed. Today, that treaty is used by the Chinese government as evidence that Tibet was always a part of China. Ugh.

    To say that Mongolia, or Manchuria, or Tibet, or West Turkistan are part of modern China because they were part of the Manchu empire is loony - CHINA wasn't part of China then! It was all part of Qing - China belonged to the Manchus, not the other way around! Geez! We're seeing classic disconnection here; a foreign power makes you their bitch for several hundred years, and after you manage to kick them out, instead of saying, "Oh, that was unpleasant, let's try to not do that to anyone else," you turn around and invade your neighbors. Nice.

    Imagine, if you will, that Turkey tapped on the US's collective shoulder in Iraq and said, "Oh, thanks, we were looking for that." Imperial claims to territory don't mean jack. And if anyone says anything about 5000 years of Chinese history, my hed asplode - people have been living in what's now Switzerland for what, 10,000 years, but no one but a complete prat would talk about 10,000 years of Swiss history.

  32. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by king-manic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Chinese government is "EVIL" but ti's effective. They are also mostly "Fair". If you follow their rules. You tend to live a normal happy life. If you do not they kill you. Thus, 1 million tibetains had the notiosn of fighting back. They are dead. The rest mostly shut up. Asian cultures aren't as arrogant and stubborn as Islamic/ Arabic cultures. They'd rather subsist under a tyrant then die under a freedom fighter.

    Thats why chinese tend not to have too much internal strife. I know I'm chinese and I visit frequently and have a large part of my family there. There are many things that go on that are un fair oppresive and such, but the Gov does try to keep order for the normal folk. For a large number of the population, life isn't bad.

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  33. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by Wordsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh shut up. The government isn't banning the film because it speaks badly about the government. A distributor is choosing not to distribute it, for a myriad of reasons, the most obvious ones being political. The first ammendment gives you a right to expression; it doesn't promise you anyone will give you a bullhorn.

    And in that particular case, it looks like another distributor is going to pick up the film anyway.

  34. That is entirely untrue. by Vthornheart · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Anyone who considers themselves a true member of the Left would be opposed to the Chinese occupation of Tibet. Have you not heard of the Tibetan freedom concert, or the numerous "Free Tibet" signs and shirts that are worn even at protests that have nothing to do with Tibet? Tibet is a big, BIG issue for the left. They are consistent.

    And as far as Cuba goes, my family comes from Cuba. Cuba is oppressive in terms of free speech, but it is far from the bloodbath that you describe it as. In fact, if you look at the latest U.N. statistics Cuba's quality of life is one of the highest in the world and tops among third world nations: it is close to on par with countries with hundreds of times their GDP, and it is only beneath those nations in quality becuase of embargos that limit their ability to distribute the goods that they have to sell. On TOP of that, Cuba holds one of the leading Biotech industries in the world; their advances rival the United States. They have developed a vaccine for Hepititis-C, a strain that has not been able to be vaccinated in the U.S. and that is not available to Americans because of said economic embargoes. They are also in the testing phases of medicine that cures certain forms of breast cancer without the need for radiation therapy. Cuba would be a highly advanced nation right now, if it weren't for the Communist-fearing embargoes placed upon them. If you want to talk about injustice in Cuba, or starving children, you're going to have to point the finger at the wealthy nations that restrict their trade.

    You talk of intellectual honesty: perhaps you should consider that the views you hold about the left and about other countries might not be true after all.

    --
    -Vendal Thornheart
    1. Re:That is entirely untrue. by king-manic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Rarely are our saints saintly or our devils truly devlish. Cuba may be doing well with what they have, but they do not have a nice administration ro government. China may be easy to villify, but it's not the orwellian state people claim. the USA isn't as bad or as good as any of the media says and isn't half as powerfull as it beleives itself to be.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  35. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by servognome · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is nothing wrong with corporate censorship. A corporation can decide what it wants to distribute or not, and what it wants to be associated with. Are you saying that corporations should distribute everything, including ant-minority films, or pro-neonazi films, no matter what the backlash?
    Disney didn't stop Farenheight 9/11 from being at Cannes, it can't stop the film from going to another distributor. All it is doing is saying it is not in their best interest to be associated with that kind of political movie

    --
    D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  36. So in other words... by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...they go from being repressed by the state, to being repressed by large corporate interests and the state. Great trade. Basic capitalism says you want to buy cheap, sell expensive, reap the difference.

    It is, cruelly and economically put, rational for corporations to preserve the chinese society as a source of cheap labor. If not them, then some other poor people of the earth. That's why you see so little real desire for change among the decision makers.

    The state is happy, the corporations are happy, the rest of the world is happy because of cheap products, and the citizens... well, who asks them anyway? That is, if they get to know enough to dissent, and feel their situation is bad enough to want to do something about it.

    It's the modern version of slavery, on a global scale. It's a lot cleaner, and a lot less obvious, but the interests are pretty much exactly the same. Produce at subsistance wages, the owner (state) and distributors (large corporations) reaping the profits.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  37. Other things to ban: by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Book of History : describes an era when China, such as it was, was a collection of feudal states that only covered the Yellow River basin.


    The Records of the Grand Historian : describe a time when China controlled the Yellow and the Long river basins, with outposts further out but not much else. Also describes the destruction of a tyrannical empire.


    The Romance of the Three Kingdoms: China is split into three parts again, all of which together are nowhere as large as China is today.



    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
  38. Red Hat SCONIX by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    What would happen if a game had all Linux boxen named "SCONIX" instead? Slashdotters would probably push for a ban ;-)

  39. Re:Interesting double standard by king-manic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How did the US and the UK "let" the Holocaust happen? It took place in Nazi-occupied parts Europe which we were busy attempting to liberate. Should we have fought harder to get there sooner?

    Chamberlain. He gave it up more then a Dallas prom queen. Arguably without him and other pacifists, hitler would have had no where near the space to manuever. Also if they didn't bitch slap germany after WWI so hard WWI arguebly woudl never have happened, the Nazi's wouldn't have arisen, and no holocaust woudl have happened.

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  40. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by king-manic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You do realise that you dont' get much of the news the rest of the world gets. This is corprate self-censoryship. Farenheight 9/11 is an obvious if somewhat weak example. When a incident arises in the middle east, say you bombed a wedding party. The US media will spin in as positive a light as possible because the majority of the News audience doesn't respond well to havign their side becoem the bad guy. In the rest of the world we hear most of the story. When you bombed A platoon of Canadian soldiers, US media spun it as an accident, while the rest of the world heard how the pilots were told to "disengage" but decided to be heroes and disobeyed orders.

    Farenheight 9/11 is propaganda from a anti-republican individual. It's not being activly oppressed but it is havign a hard time finding distibution, for fear of government punishment on the distributor. Think of it this way, a corporation is in business for money. The film is garenteed to make a profit (moore has a build in audience). Disney refused to distribute it, likly for fear of "bad" treatment if they do.

    Although the US has very little Active censorship (aside from sex), they do have a lot of filterign that happens for different reasons, thus you get a US positive view of the world. But incidentally most of the world doesn't lik you too much. As someone else pointed out, it's not what you got, but how you behave. Like a grade school bully who has a rich family.

    Quickie examples:
    the USA promotes free trade. The USA slaps tarrifs on Canadian softwood lumber, because the US lumber lobby put enough money in Government coffers. The USA loses the WTO ruling, this tarrif is said to be unfair by a trade body the US helped create. (hippocrites)

    Canada has 1 case of BSF, the US closes all borders to Canadian beef. The US has 1 case of BSF, attributes it to a Canadian supplier, no evidence exsists for this. Canada substatially beefs out it's detection methods, the USA keeps it's old detection methods (the ones the canadians were using before). Border stays closed. Reason: US ranchers lobby put enough money in Government coffers to keep it closed.

    And all this is to your "best friend" and neighbor. I hate to see how you fuck over your non-friends.

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  41. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by Wordsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And the response to that is simple:

    You were legally entitled to make the post you just did. No one can throw you in jail for making the argument contained in your text.

    Of course a great deal of spin, filtering and self-censorship goes on. Of course Big Media is going to present news in a fashion helpful to it financially and poltically. That's no surprise. But so long as dissent is legal and the marketplace of ideas isn't regulated by men with guns and jails, we're basically OK. You and I and anyone with a set of working vocal chords (or typing fingers) is free to respond to whatever nonsense the powers-that-be present with whatever resources we have available to us.

  42. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by Too+Much+Noise · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You do realize that, fundamentally, there's no difference between the censorship in the US and China, right?

    The basic pattern is to threaten people where they hurt in the given context. In China, the natural lever is inprisonment. In the US, it's money. The use of the lever can be direct ro indirect, but the principle stays the same.

    Also, the effect of purporting a lie as the official truth is the same, whether the government does that directly or private corporations do it for the government. If you have no access to an alternate opinion, "freedom of speech" is a moot point, as you had been trained to accept the "one truth" without blinking. And even if, after you've been indoctrinated with the official truth, you hear someone voicing a different oppinion, you're more likely to consider that person mad - after all, everyone knows what the "truth" is.

    This is the line China is taking now - repeat something strong enough and for long enough and it will become truth.

    Free speech is worthless by itself. You need at least an open-minded education to be able to begin and understand/use it.

  43. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by RML · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Scenario 1: The US bombs a gathering of rebels. The rebels claim it was a "wedding party" (everyone has guns at wedding parties, right?). US and foreign journalists pick up conflicting reports.

    Scenario 2: The US bombs a wedding party. US spokesmen claim it was a gathering of rebels (everyone has guns at wedding parties, right?). US and foreign journalists pick up conflicting reports.

    Now, I won't say which I think is more likely. Are the rebels lying, or did the US make a mistake?

    (Most of the rest of your criticisms are dead on. This particular one just irks me.)

    --
    Human/Ranger/Zangband
  44. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by HeghmoH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, it's not.

    If I buy a bootleg copy of Hearts of Iron in China and get caught by the police, what will happen to me? I could go to prison, a nice comfy Chinese prison, for a very long time.

    If I buy a bootleg copy of Fahrenheit 9/11, what will happen? I can't get caught by the police, because it's not a crime. (Selling without permission of the copyright holder is illegal, buying is not.) I can pop it in my DVD player and go to town, invite my friends, call the Mayor, the Chief of Police, and the President and tell them all, "I'm watching Fahrenheit 9/11, and you can kiss my ass!" Nothing will happen.

    In fact, I won't even have to buy a bootleg. The movie is now legally unencumbered, and I'm sure they will find a distributer very soon. Because we live in a, you know, free country, all you need is one maverick movie house who sees the incredible amount of money that film can bring in, and you have a nationwide Friday-night release.

    Corporate censorship is bad, but it should never be compared to government censorship. There is an enormous difference between simply refusing to distribute a work, and punishing anyone who possesses a work.

    --
    Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  45. Re:Of course China wants to cover up Tibet Genocid by the+gnat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They'd rather subsist under a tyrant then die under a freedom fighter.

    I used to work with a number of Chinese scientists who'd come to the US for grad school. Some of them clearly intended to stay here as long as possible, but others were more nationalistic. I asked one student (who had pictures of Zhou Enlai and the aftermath of the Naking massacre on his desk) why obviously intelligent people like him continued to put up with the Communists. He said it was because the situation in China kept improving: they now have some form of capitalism, better technology, continuing superpower status, and so on. And as you suggest, as long as you follow the rules you'll do pretty well. He said that if things got worse, they might be more inclined to want a change of government, but right now nobody wanted to rock the boat. I guess if your parents lived through the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, modern China must seem pretty terrific.

    I've heard similar claims made about the US, although they're usually made by people who think we're not communist enough.

  46. Alan Sokal, please call your office by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Perhaps. But if you tell it long enough, and object to the truth long enough. Eventually you'll persevere. Truth is subjective. Although we love to think of it as absolute, someone has to define it. If there is no "opposing truth", then the remaining "truth" is the truth.

    Okay, I'll play the deconstructionism game. "2 + 2 = 4". Is this objective or subjective truth? If the latter, what's the opposing truth? Or is this sum just a piece of propaganda which has been perpetrated over the course of millennia?

    --
    All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
    1. Re:Alan Sokal, please call your office by king-manic · · Score: 3, Interesting


      Okay, I'll play the deconstructionism game. "2 + 2 = 4". Is this objective or subjective truth? If the latter, what's the opposing truth? Or is this sum just a piece of propaganda which has been perpetrated over the course of millennia?

      2+2 = 4.0
      2+2 = 04
      2+2 = 2^2
      2+2 = 999 - 995
      2+2 = round (3.9)
      10 + 10 = 100 (obvious on slashdot)
      2+2 = 11 (think about this one)

      All of those might be equivilent but a lot of times, the underlying facts are the same and the truth is an interpretation. Thus it says those coutnries are thiers, we don't see it that way. the underlying "truth" is they control those areas reaguardless of how legitimate that control is.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  47. I give the Germans a little more credit by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Basically anything that can be construed as glorifing the Nazis is banned, and that includes playing a game where you can be them. The reason for this isn't because they are trying to pretend like WWII and the Holocaust never happened, but quite the opposite. They still see this as an enormous black mark on their country and they allow nothing that makes it look anything but bad.

    An over reaction, to be sure, but an understandable one and something you can respect a little more. China is banning things that don't agree with their offical version of history. Germany is banning things that could be seen as glorifing what they consider to be their darkest days.

  48. Women keeping surnames by RogL · · Score: 2, Informative

    Do you not know anyone who's gotten married in the last few decades? In the USA, women certainly can keep their surname after marriage. Simply... continue using it! If you don't explicitly change government IDs, you retain the existing name. Nothing to it.

  49. Answer by amake · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nevermind, I just figured it out. "Manchukuo" is the Chinese word for Japan-occupied Manchuria, written in the old romanization system (Wade-Giles?). The modern spelling (pinyin) would be "manzhouguo." Isn't Chinese romanization confusing?

  50. Re:Interesting double standard by belmolis · · Score: 3, Informative
    Tibet has been continuously ruled by China (via the Qing Dynasty) for several hundreds years prior.

    Hogwash. This betrays a complete lack of knowledge of Chinese and Tibetan history. Imperial China routinely claimed sovereignty over every state with which it had diplomatic relations, on the theory that the Emperor could only enter into the relationship of master to vassal, including Japan, Okinawa (an independant country until 1609), Korea, and Vietnam. The Qing dynasty may have claimed sovereignty over Tibet, but Tibet was de facto an independent state and did not acknowledge Chinese sovereignty. The Qing did not exercise effective control of Tibet. Nor did the Qing carry out, or for that matter, even attempt, the cultural genocide that the People's Republic has engaged in. The Qing didn't destroy thousands of temples, kill thousands of monks and nuns, suppress the use of the Tibetan language, and settle millions of Han colonists in Tibet. The destruction of Tibetan culture began in 1951, not during the Qing.

    In any case, as a matter of international law, the critical fact is that in 1951, at the time of the Chinese invasion, Tibet was an independant state. It had a distinctive population occupying a well-defined territory under the effective control of its own government. The government of Tibet issued currency and passports that were internationally recognized. It entered into diplomatic relations as a sovereign nation with other countries, including Nepal,Mongolia, Great Britain, and Ladakh. In fact, The Republic of China negotiated with Tibet as a sovereign nation at the Simla Conference in 1913-1914.

    Notice that the parent contradicts himself. He claims that Tibet was under the control of the Qing, then justifies Chinese occupation of Tibet by the claim that the traditional government headed by the Dalai Lama was an oppressive theocracy. Unless he wants to adopt the implausible view that the traditional government somehow developed between 1911 (end of the Qing) and 1951, by critizing the traditional government he is admitting that the Qing did not in fact control Tibet.

    In any case, if the traditional government was oppressive, and it did indeed have its faults, that doesn't justify the introduction of an equaly if not more oppressive foreign government, nor does it justify massive Chinese colonization and cultural genocide. An internal revolution in Tibet might have been justified (though in fact the current Dalai Lama, who was 17 years old at the time of the Chinese invasion, has proved to be a reformist who would no doubt have made considerable changes), but the only legitimate role that China or other foreign countries might have played would have been to assist Tibetans in establishing a more just government.

  51. Re:In regards to Tibet... by YetAnotherAnonymousC · · Score: 2, Informative

    Xinjiang has been under the control of China for just over two millenia.

    Incorrect. Xinjiang was most recently not under Chinese control during the Ming dynasty. It has at various times within the last two millenia been under the control of the Mongols, Tibetans, and been semi-organized/independent under Turkish tribes.

    Oh, and Machuria was independent during the Ming dynasty as well. And the only reason it wasn't distinct afterwards (through the 19th century) was that the Manchu conquered Ming China.

  52. The Truth Is out There by Klanglor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems that everyone is so sure about theire position. And blame propagandat affecting their mind.

    But what is the REAL truth, because after all, in North America, there is a BIG propaganda that Tibet is NOT part of China. Whereas, with in the contry it is saying that Tibet IS.

    1) Are you all historians?

    2) Can you actualy read Antique Chinness Caligraphy Which Survived WWII?

    3) Do you actualy have these documents?

    So we are stuck with one major problem, the only people who can actualy verify the facts are chinesse historian living in china. which for a fact, may or may not saying the truth due to political enforcement. Yet, outside the contry, strong political reason makes Tibet a strategic military stronghold in advent of invasion of china. In short, both party (inside and outside) will or may curently have strong interest of persuading their point of view.

    The truth is out there, not what the news is saying, in ancient chinesse scroll :P

  53. as a matter of fact, yes... by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... in that area of the world, most males own firearms, usually at least an AK, for various reasons, and YES again, it is a big part of their culture to shoot them off at times of celebration.

    That stuff is widely known, BTW, so it's not far fetched at all to believe the people's story at that massacre site. It's happened all over, just last week I was listening (radio interview)to a soldier who just got out, describing how his unit would shoot civilians at the drop of a hat.

    You'll just have to face it, the US is starting to get pretty trigger happy over there. And right off the bat, just think on this, EVERYONE "detained" is automatically a terrorist, instantly a non human basically. That's official US policy. All you have to do is follow the news from more than a few places and you can see that. And they really don't care too much about killing innocents (collateral damage), because they had to go in and save innocents from getting killed, on the way to the WMD giant stashes, that were one second away from being launched towards the US. It's a sham really, and we are looking worse and worse every day around the world. On 9-11-2001 everyone around the planet sympathised with us, now they mostly distrust us, and it's PRECISELY from our governments official actions since then. No other credible explanation except that.

    I live here, and I am fully confident in saying the bulk of the population here is just plain old fashioned jingoists. Wish I had a dime for every "nuke the ay-rabs!" I have heard from people or read on forums. And the less informed they are,by talking to them to find out, the more stupid sounding and violently racist they sound. That's the PLAN, that's why we have a mass media that operates like that, it's to keep people faked out, dumbed down and following in good little goose stepping fashion, whatever these "elites" think they want. And it WORKS. The theme of genocide is still alive and kicking, unfortunately it's coming from a lot of places, INCLUDING the US, and it's reflected in our governments actions, it speech patterns into officially recognized propoganda newspeak ("detainees"? how utterly intellectually dishonest, and almost every journalist out there still uses the term), and in our controlled large news media which DEFINETLY censors and massages anything important.

  54. Re:A new standard in trolls by ArsSineArtificio · · Score: 2, Funny
    BERKELY CALIFORNIA

    No, seriously, you really did misspell "Berkeley, California".

    --
    All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.