Chinese Force Mass Closure Of Net Cafes
Chien Andalusia writes "According to this article from the BBC, the Chinese authorities closed 12,575 net cafes towards the end of 2004. Due to the expense of computer hardware, net cafés have become very popular in China in recent years. The laws governing such cafés are very strict, especially in relation to minimising the amount of exposure children can get to the internet. For example, no net café is allowed to open within 200 metres of a middle or elementary school. The article also briefly discusses other restrictions imposed on Chinese net cafés."
I suppose it's only a matter of time til the chinese government learns what most people already know. If more than a few people know a piece of information, then it's pretty hopeless to try to contain it.
Now if only the RIAA/MPAA would learn this lesson.
Serve pot and they don't even need Internet access. They'll just sit quietly grooving to the screen saver.
I was in Beijing last summer, and the one thing that struck me was how our American media promotes an image of an evil tyranny in China. (While it is true that most freedoms - as we know them here - don't exist, it isn't the spawn of evil its made out to be.)
;)
I had no problems accessing the Net from my hotel - albeit an intl. dialup connection - and even visited a few Net cafes. Most people I spoke to said the Internet was great but that we Americans don't realize that what we may want or consider a "great freedom" here in the US is not considered as important in the rest of the world. (Alright before you start going berserk and start spewing off about basic human rights, consider that we have made many, many mistakes in the past and it took us time as well to reach a state where we consider these freedoms as our rights; give 'em time!)
Anyway, my point being, Internet was completely accessible except for a few sites that seemed to be proxied out at the Net cafes - Slashdot being one of them!
China, for all the hype about markets opening up their society, is still a totalitarian communist country.
No, they're a totalitarian capitalist country now. Arguably fascistic, but certainly not democratic.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Its their country, their rules..
...
Let's take that idea to a logical conclusion:
Sudan...it iss their country, their rules.
Serbia...it is their country, their rules.
We can go back in history and include Cambodia, Nazi Germany,
I guess hatred of America is so strong these days that the Slashbots feel compelled to defend every other government, even some of the most despotic and totalitarian.
You're right, human rights abuses are only interesting when it's new/exciting information .. because it's not about the information, it's all about the topical buzz, the fashionable memes, yeah man. I mean who wants to discuss China's ongoing human rights abuses, that's like sooo yesterday already! What's "cool" today?
Indeed; Communism is thoroughly dead in China. The current ruling gang apparently doesn't even give it lip service any more. Many writers with a bit of historical knowledge have commented that China is again ruled by mandarins, though they may not use that term.
It is impressive how long rhetorical terms can last. Thus, Communism died in the old USSR when Stalin took power and became in all but name a new tsar. But Western propagandists still used that country as an example of Communism 50 years later, despite all the objections that the term no longer applied in any meaningful fashion.
It's likely that 50 years from now, Western politicos will still be using China as an example of Communism, in their attempts to extend the old Communist/Capitalist false dichotomy.
It's really just a way of blindly using code words to avoid at reality. A reasonable approach would be to simply treat terms like "Communist", "Capitalist", etc. as symptoms of writing without much thought or understanding. It's hardly worth debating when such terms appear, since (as a form of Godwin's observation) such terms usually mean that no reasonable discussion will be possible. In American politics, the terms "Liberal" and "Conservative" have come to have the same import.
OTOH, if someone refers to events in China as "Chinese", reasonable discussion of events there might be possible. The current rulers of China aren't beholden to any outside ideology; they are their own people, with their own ideas and goals. Understanding will come from talking about them as they are, not by describing them with foreign words that don't apply very well.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
I am from Ukraine, and in November, when it was Orange Revolution here in Ukraine, I've read various people comments on bbc.com on that topic (our revolution). While most comments were positive, I remember one comment from china's women; she was very negative and said that people should better care about other things as food, money and such.
May be for china people it's acceptable that your goverment are gangsters and thiefs as long as they give you enouth food. For me, it isn't.
PS. Sorry for my bad English.