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]"

39 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 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.

    2. 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.
    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.
  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 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.
    3. 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."
    4. 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
    5. 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...
    6. 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

  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 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?!'"
  6. 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!

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

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

  8. 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/

  9. 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.
  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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."

  13. 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?

  14. ++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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.

  17. 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!!!!
  18. 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!"
  19. 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
  20. 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!
  21. 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
  22. 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.

  23. 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.

  24. 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
  25. 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.

  26. 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!