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]"
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.
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!
"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.
To really piss them off, send them a copy of Shadow Warrior.
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.
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.
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."
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?
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.
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.
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.
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."
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
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.
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.