How Chinese Evade Government's Web Controls

Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "China is moving to 'centralize all China-based Web news and opinion under a state regulator,' the Wall Street Journal reports, but determined citizens have found a way out of previous restrictions in what has become a cat-and-mouse game: 'Many Chinese Internet users, dismissing what they call government scare tactics, find ways around censorship. The government requires users of cybercafs to register with their state-issued ID cards on each visit, but some users avoid cybercaf registration by paying off owners. In response, the government has installed video cameras in some cafs and shut others. ... While certain words such as "democracy" are banned in online chat rooms, China's Web users sometimes transmit sensitive information as images, or simply speak in code, inserting special characters such as underscoring into typing.' Also noteworthy is that major portals seem to be cooperating with authorities' restrictions: 'Insiders who work for the big portal sites say they are already in regular contact with authorities about forbidden topics, such as the outlawed Falun Gong religious group, which their teams of Web editors pull off bulletin boards.'"

Comments

100 million users and climbing

[It doesn't come easy]

Note to Chinese government...censorship of the Internet is a lost cause, give it up. If you want to be the next economic superpower, you are going to have to deal with dissenting ideas found on the Internet. You'd do better to work out an ongoing public discussion forum on incorporating the best ideas into the public and private sectors instead of trying to censor access.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[garcia]

Note to Chinese government...censorship of the Internet is a lost cause, give it up. If you want to be the next economic superpower, you are going to have to deal with dissenting ideas found on the Internet. You'd do better to work out an ongoing public discussion forum on incorporating the best ideas into the public and private sectors instead of trying to censor access.

Yet the majority of Americans would blindly accept limitations on their Constitutional rights in the name of "National Security" or "Terrorism".

It's amazing how differently our two populations behave.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[SatanicPuppy]

Not going to work. Too much of their system is based on control of information. they have to try and hold on to that control, because if they lose it, they'll end up with another Tiananmen Square...and another and another...

Here, people are passive. Things are too good, no one cares enough to put themselves out. Everyone has too much to lose. The population is also on the old side, which tends to curb activism.

There? The more they communicate, the more they realize that they're paid nothing, they're treated like crap, they're not allowed to have dissenting opinions without being thrown in jail. The more they'll realise that they don't really have that much to lose...Not everyone, of course, but what percentage would it take to be too much to suppress? There are a hell of a lot of people in China...And thanks to their female infantacide issue, they've got a large number of unattached young men, the most volatile population group.

China's in for interesting times.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Irish_Samurai]

Most Americans also have a car, two TV's, a video game system, a cell phone, a job , and could probably obtain illegal substances without fear of being caught.

They can also protest openly (within reason) against the government without fear of being arrested.

We're basically too busy entertaining ourselves and stuffing food in our faces to realize we are being slowly robbed of our freedoms.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[usernotfound]

In their chatrooms though, they are forbidden from saying that "the United States' adoption of democracy is the single worst idea in history". They dont want Democracy to exist, even as an idea. It DOES exist, regardless of any constitution's or policy's thoughts of it, and any attempt to hide that fact is just ridiculous.

It would never happen that the US would block all online material with reference to "bombs" and "nuclear power plants" just because we're afraid of ANY thought of that in ANY context. Bombs exist. Nuclear power plants exist. Democracy Exists. The End.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[garcia]

Most Americans also have a car, two TV's, a video game system, a cell phone, a job , and could probably obtain illegal substances without fear of being caught.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that of the online population of Chinese residents (100 million) most of them have TVs, gaming systems, and certainly a cell phone. They also likely have a job and possibly a car. Illegal substances, while rarer, I'm sure still exist and can be obtained w/o too much worry.

While entertaining themselves via the Internet and other means, they are still able to see that their "freedoms" are being entroached and that they need to subvert government "scare tactics". Americans would just shrug and say, "I'm safer now because of tight and constitutionally ignorant controls than I was before 9/11/01."

I wonder at which point Americans will revert to standing up for their rights. Probably when their TV shows are edited even more all in the name of Family First.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Itchy Rich]

They can also protest openly (within reason) against the government without fear of being arrested.

All except Cindy Sheehan, who was arrested for protesting in Washington yesterday.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[foniksonik]

It's been four years... I still don't see these limitations you speak of, unless you're referring to Howard Stern being forced into a 500 million dollar contract w/ Sirrius Satellite.... (won't someone think of the children???)

Please elaborate on this. I just haven't heard of anyone's rights being limited. I still see war protests happening. I still see people speaking freely about whatever political views they have. I still see religious and areligious views being upheld in courts of law. I still see people getting due process (as much as at any time in US history and you could argue for more if you look at equal rights as a whole over the last 50 years). It seems to me we have less limitations than at any time in our history. Yes the same old arguements over what is included in those rights are still there... and being constantly redefined by our court system. If you're looking at the last 8 years... well it's almost over and a new Executive will be in office soon.. let's see if our Democracy/Republic will continue??? I'm betting it will and that we'll have just as much freedom as we do now and did 10 years ago, 20 years ago... maybe even more???

The US has a very long steep cliff to fall off before it gets anywhere close to China in terms of limited rights of the people.

Fortunately it looks like the people of China are coming up the hill to meet us rather than us sliding down to meet them, despite the boulders their government keeps throwing at them from the lofty heights of hypocrisy.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Anonymous Coward]

You apparently managed to miss the "within reason" part the original poster included.

Cindy Sheehan and the other 300-odd protestors were not protesting "within reason". Had they decided to protest in an appropriate place, they would have been left alone. No one would have bothered them.

Protesting in the middle of a city isn't "within reason" - it's purposefully attempting to cause havok by distrupting daily life.

So, yes, you can protest within reason. Cindy Sheehan has demonstrated that reason is quite clearly beyond her, as she continues to disgrace her son's memory by harassing a system he quite clearly believed very strongly in. Her son chose to join the Armed Services. No one made him. Protesting his choice in this form is simply disrespectful of his memory.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Irish_Samurai]

100 million out of 1,306,313,812 is not a majority. Actually, it's nowhere close.

So even if the complete 100 million online Chinese had everything they could want, a much larger chunk of the population is really unhappy with the state of their existence. Report on the subject. Basically, the American people are given all the Soma they want. By the time we need to stand up for ourselves, we won't know how.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[AviLazar]

The thing about our government, our policies, our laws is that they can be modified/reversed. If Congress comes out with an assinine law that inhibits our rights, we can have it removed. The President can veto it, the Supreme Court can declare it unconstitutional...and in the end the people can vote new representatives (and there are plenty of choices, contrary to popular belief) to recind the laws.

To equate the US gov't to the Chinese gov't in any fashion is just nonsense.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[fafalone]

Which is exactly what she wanted and tried to do. She purposely did not apply for a permit to protest and purposely sat down in front of the White House, knowing, and being told, she had to move along. Her entire goal in the protests was to get arrested to attract media attention. She was absolutely thrilled and smiling when she finally got arrested. Anybody who thinks this is an act of government oppression rather than a publicity stunt is just as dangerously biased to the left as the government is to the right and so wrapped up in their anti-Bush administration views they've lost touch with reality just as much as the religious right that's attacking the Constitution.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[badfish99]

Yes, I agree. If Cindy Sheehan had protested somewhere appropriate, like locked in her own house, no-one would have bothered her because no-one would have known she was protesting.

Her crime was to protest in an unreasonable place, i.e. where the press and public could see her. Of course anyone protesting in such a place should be arrested.

And all solders have joined the army of their own free will, so they must all want to die. So how stupid to complain about a war that is only killing soldiers and foreigners.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Irish_Samurai]

I think we see eye to eye on this, but I disagree with some of your analysis.

The 100 million internet active Chinese are represenatives for the rest of their population. These people have the skills to use the internet to their advantage and have the resources to do. They use these skills to voice the opinions of those who cannot, and have been doing it for some time now - hence the attempts at censorship.

In reference to my previous statement of Americans having cars, cell phones, ect - I would argue that the 100 million internet active DO NOT have these things. Internet cafes are very popular in China, I can't say that I've seen too many here in the US. Now, we do have free WiFi everywhere but that is not the same. The free WiFi requires that we bring our own equipment, an internet cafe provides all of the hardware for you. This difference alludes to the fact that most of the Chinese population DOES NOT have the financial resources to obtain these items. Either the infrastructure does not exist or the proliferation of the hardware is not on par with what it is in the US.

Now, if most of the 100 million internet active in China cannot afford an item that is manufactured in their borders and available at a fraction of what it costs here (an internet capable computer), why would they have a car? And how could they afford it? A cell phone, I can concede that point, but only with the caveat that the infrastructure for its use is not on par with the ubiquitous coverage in the US.

Almost all of our population has a cell, a car, a computer, ect. For the sake of argument lets use a grossly underestimated number of 70%. That is almost ten times more that the 7% of the internet active Chinese, and thats assuming every one in that 100 million has all of these items. Now what do you think the difference in social response would be between an internet user who looks around and sees a society where comfort is almost ubiquitous and a user who sees that most of the people around him are impoverished?

Both users can make a case for being oppressed in some manner and having their rights taken from them, but the American can look around and easily justify to themselves that it's not that bad. That his fellow countrymen have a pretty ok life and that a few liberties are no big thing. I do not believe a Chinese citizen could look around and come to the same conclusion.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[thebdj]

Protests do still happen, and while some people will argue with you that the federal, state and local governments create these "restricted" areas for these demonstrations as a means to censor the protestors this really isn't the case. There are actually plenty of good and logical safety reasons for this, so as far as our ability to still protest and have protected speech, those aren't going anywhere. You know why those won't go anywhere? Because some of the largest and richest people in the USA are media conglomerates or other people with a high interest in the media.

Due process, however, is one that comes under direct fire. The Patriot Act, as it is so called, actually gave the ability for the US to hold suspected terror suspects as "enemy combatants" taking them outside the realm of Due Process. This "war on terror" is a new beast with no borders, as has been pointed out by the government before. The problem is this law provides no limits to who can be placed in prison indefinitely and not given access to legal counsel or a right to a speedy trial. While it might be a bit paranoid to think that this will turn into a witch hunt where thousands or millions or normal citizens are locked away, it is a possibility thanks to the law.

You are correct in stating we are a long way off from a totalitarian state as China. The bi-partisan government does sort of prevent a single party from gaining too much control, but things could change if Democrats or Republicans were to lose bad in elections resulting in a major lopsided government. The bi-partisan problem also prevents new ideas from being introduced because third parties, two of the largest being the Libertarians and Greens, rarely see much if any coverage, and neither party has had much success getting into the federal government.

It might only be a matter of time before we see the end of China as it is today. The government already relented to a capitalist economy, seeing it as the best way to promote the countries growth and make it a world power to truly be concerned about. I think that slowly they will be forced to change their ways, but not in any sort of rapid progression, unless of course there were to be a political uprising, but I do not see that being too likely.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[TheGavster]

You can sit wherever you want. But if you're going to have a couple hundred people, and be making a racket, in a busy urban area, you need to stay the hell out of the way. Getting a permit means that traffic can be redirected, police can know what you're doing, etc. It's not like they use permits to silence people; the Klan gets permits to demonstrate all the time (though quite often the police need to protect them, rather than keep them in line). To not even make an effort to follow proceedure is just retarded, but totally in line with Cindy "Withrdraw from Occupied New Orleans" Sheehan's love of the limelight.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Irish_Samurai]

Or across the street.

Sitting on the sidewalk in front of the White House has never been deemed an appropriate place to hold a demonstration, but people do it across the street all the time AFAIK. It should go without explaining why disallowing a mob to sit right in front of that Capitol has been classified as unreasonable because of the security nightmare it presents.

I'm not against Cindy saying whatever she wants. I may not agree, but I don't want to stop her, because if she is silenced - I could be silenced too. But this was a publicity stunt, and one that worked too. If I wanted to protest something and motivate some people to my cause, I might have done something similar. But lets not confuse a ticketable offense with squashing a civil liberty.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[Mac Degger]

You have a concentration camp filled with people who are bereft of habeus corpus, and will not be tried by a propper jury. You have a camp filled with people (including american citizens!) for who the law does not apply.

How the fuck dare you say "I just haven't heard of anyone's rights being limited"? With free speech zones where protesters are herded to fields miles away from where the action is, how the fuck can you still say "I still see people speaking freely about whatever political views they have."? With religious thought being pushed into science classes, how the fuck can you say "I still see religious and areligious views being upheld in courts of law"?

With all that going on, how can you say that the US is free-er than ever? Are you really that good at deluding yourself?

And remember, if you reply: 'But [blahterroristsblah]'; that is not a counterargument. That is rationalisation.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[MightyMartian]

China hasn't been meaningfully Communist since Mao died. It is now simply a technocracy that is seeking to placate any desire by its citizens to be free by giving them the material trappings of Western capitalism while keeping them from any real freedoms. It's really an interesting experiment. We'll see if people can actually be paid to be subservient to tyrants or whether the desire for liberty will ultimately make a sufficiently well-educated and prosperous society say "Screw you" to the tyrants.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[WhiplashII]

Yes, because if we don't give any money to those nasty Chinese, they will be SO better off.

Sorry, I just couldn't help myself - really, this has to be the absolute, dumbest thing that many people believe! The people in China will do anything to work in a plant making products for the free countries - they are the only way to improve their lives. We consider the working conditions poor, yes - but to them it is heaven. You mean we would be able to buy enough food to feed our families? WOW, let me in!

Better working conditions are the natural result of full (or close to that) employment. Poor working conditions are the direct result of not enough jobs. These people are not slaves, no matter what you think or have been told - they are making rational choices, chosing to work because the alternative is worse. Than someone like you comes along and tells them that they are not allowed to work - throwing them back into the pit.

Even if you could enforce a law to say "minimum wage is now $20 per hour" or whatever, what you would be doing is decreasing the amount of jobs available, essentially taking money from those that have nothing and giving it to others.

Your plan doesn't work, and leaves everyone out of work - and then we all starve...

Re:100 million users and climbing

[UltimateRobotLover]

Soldiers join up understanding that as part of their duty they may be killed. However, the government has an equal duty to not randomly send them to their deaths for no good reason other than increasing the Haliburton share price.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[dual_boot_brain]

try sitting in the middle of a highway or on the railroad tracks or on top of a missile silo. Hell try sitting in a class, a movie, or a concert you haven't paid for. NO you can not sit down anywhere you please. I'm sorry to dissapoint you, but there are certain rules that people are generally expected to follow. She violated those rules deliberately so as to get arrested and garner more publicity.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[orgelspieler]

Just to set the record straight, I think that Sheehan is whiney and annoying, and I disagree with most of what she stands for. Nevertheless, I am outraged that she was arrested.

First of all, from the reports that I've read, she actually was arrested for protesting a.k.a. "demonstrating without a permit." But even if your argument were true, that she was arrested for blocking a sidewalk, I'd still have problems with it.

Have you been to DC? Hundreds of panhandlers, vendors, and other people block public walkways there all the time. Do they get arrested? No. So this supposed law would only be selectively enforced, which is a Bad Thing (tm). If there was such a law against blocking sidewalks, I assure you it would only serve one purpose: to give a "valid" reason to arrest protestors.

The charges pressed against Sheehan may or may not mention protesting, but make no mistake that that's the real reason she was arrested.

This is a continuing pattern of unchecked revocation of civil liberties. Both major parties were guilty of this sort of behavior around conventions and campaign stops. Check out the First Amendment. It says that the Congress shall make no law restricting our freedom to peaceably assemble. Last time I checked, sitting in a public walkway with 200 like-minded citizens counts as a peaceable assembly. And please don't give me any crap about needing a permit to protest. Such a requirement has too great of a chilling effect on free speech and assembly rights to be considered constitutional. Sure, they let the protesters have their permit to protest across the street this time, but who's to say they won't grant the permit next time?

DISCLAIMER: I am a raging libertarian, and I'd be surprised if any of my arguments would actually hold up in a courtroom.

PS: What ever happened to the Politics section? It seems like ever since the election, it's sort of fallen out of favor.

Re:100 million users and climbing

[scotty1024]

Guangzhou indeed has a population of 10M but as big as that number sounds to American's, the majority of China's population 1B of 1.3B lives as peasants eking out a living in rural squalor with no cell phones and barely enough to eat.

To such people concepts like "democracy" are meaningless, concepts like more protein in their diets, education and medical care have meaning.

If you want to see why China keeps such a tight control on their population, just look a bit north to Russia. I'm sure the recent rapid descent of Russia into the open rank poisonous sewer of humanity it is now has been an ample shock rod to the gonads of the Chinese government.

I doubt many of those decrying Google et al realize that China just recently became self sufficient for feeding its own people. And by self sufficient, I don't mean to an American standard of diet. I mean just enough food so people don't die, not enough food for everyone to thrive and grow to their full genetic potential. The Chinese government has been rapidly, extremely rapidly, opening itself to a "Market Economy". But to continue that growth they MUST maintain stability. With out stability Bank of America, Citibank, Chase, et al will not establish themselves. And with out their help China's desperately over heated economic growth will collapse. And along with it every Chinese citizen's best hope at a future democracy.

China needs our help and we need China's cheap consumer goods to fill our modern version of "Bread and circuses". We are at present as two one legged individuals supporting each other as we hobble down the street together, each needing the other's support to stay upright.

Re:TOR

[Anonymous Coward]

Tor is easily detected and easily blocked.

Tor will hide the information you're viewing or sending but it will not stop the authorities from knowing that you have something to hide.

Useless.

[wlan0]

Even more, when the young hackers and spammers in China realise that they are being opressed, they will try to get out, and I'm sure they'll open up a lot. It's impossible to regulate so many people on something as free as the internet.

Communism requires information restrictions

[wheelbarrow]

The Chinese Communist governement is fighting a battle that they will eventually lose because they have lost the hearts and minds of their people. The internet today provides the average Chinese citizen with enough information about alternative forms of government that communist propaganda is just one source of information among many. The Chinese communist government cannot finger every hole in the dike forever. They're already knee deep in the leaks. I'm proud to be part of the wider information technology community that is taking communism down.

Re:Communism requires information restrictions

[Anonymous Coward]

Communism took itself down in China years ago.

No, whats hanging on for dear life there is fascism. The government is attempting to control everything you think or do, from what political party you support to what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home. Meanwhile, the state and our exalted leader is beyond reproach, and anyone who says otherwise is a traitor to our country.

Of course

[kevin_conaway]

Also noteworthy is that major portals seem to be cooperating with authorities' restrictions

Thats noteworthy? That the big companies in China are complying with Chinese law? I'm speechless.

Kudos for the citizens for finding clever ways to communicate. Its not as if they can just PGP their messages or do anything really suspicious. Just the fact that you're not doing "normal" surfing would probably be enough to raise someones eyebrow.

The problem with banning the words

[crovira]

is that you ban the opinions on the words as well.

You ban the opinions that democracy is not right for China at this particular time in its history.

You ban the opinions that the Falun Gong are a bunch of deluded nuts who are being used for various purposes.

There are several sides, including the gummints, to every story.

Re:The problem with banning the words

[Rakshasa Taisab]

There's an interesting fantasy book by Gene Wolfe where an empire has declared that one may only speak using sentences from the holy books. This was supposed to prevent anyone from communicating anything improper.

So a captive from this empire would tell a story by selecting passages from this holy book that matched what he wanted to say, it was not as efficient and required the listener to interpret more. But still it did not prevent him from telling a story unrelated to the holy books.

Banning words will only make the communication channel less efficient, and somewhat more ambigious, but people will still be able to say what they want.

Re:The problem with banning the words

[limabone]

Darmok and Jilad at Tenagra!

Re:Astroturf?

[TheRaven64]

I don't mind people submitting things that they have written or are affiliated with (although the times I've been on Slashdot someone else has submitted). At least the author is honest about it - their name contains their affiliation, so it's not like they are trying to trick you into visiting their site.

Re:Information freed!

[AKAImBatman]

It's worse than just censorship. The problem is that China is commiting blatent violations of their own constitution. From the summary:

...such as the outlawed Falun Gong religious group...

Now take a look at their constitution:

Article 36. Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of religious belief. No state organ, public organization or individual may compel citizens to believe in, or not to believe in, any religion; nor may they discriminate against citizens who believe in, or do not believe in, any religion. The state protects normal religious activities. No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the state. Religious bodies and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination.

But it's okay that they throw these people in jail because...

Article 51. The exercise by citizens of the People's Republic of China of their freedoms and rights may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society and of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens.

(Emphasis in the original.) So in one article, the "People's" Republic of China says that their entire constitution is subject to the whim of the state. Is that really freedom and personal rights?

Pecunia Non Olet

[korba]

Also noteworthy is that major portals seem to be cooperating with authorities' restrictions.

Happy 7th Birthday, Google.

Re:Information freed!

[Anonymous Coward]

So in one article, the "People's" Republic of China says that their entire constitution is subject to the whim of the state.

Well, shit, at least the Chinese have the decency to put that article in their Constitution. Plenty of other governments do exactly the same thing, they just pretend that they don't. The Chinese are refreshingly honest and up-front about it.

Re:TOR

[texasthunder]

I talked with the TOR writer and he said that the users in China would need a TOR directory server. That can easily be blocked. That is what is really needed a way for users in China to access a TOR directory server.

Re:Information freed!

[david.given]

...no law can trump humanity's moral law...

Humanity's what? That's a totally meaningless phrase.

Every person in this world has the God-given (or inherent) right to speak.

And this is a dangerous phrase. You have exactly one inherent right: to die. I, for one, intend to put off exercising that right as long as possible. What you are talking about here is a privilege, and like all privileges, it must be worked for. Denying this is going to lead to exactly the phenomenon you're seeing in the US: erosion of civil liberties because people aren't willing to work for them --- because, after all, if they're God-given rights then God will look after them, right?

Remember: there is no one true way. You believe it is morally correct to allow people to say what they will, simply because you live in a culture that thinks that is important. Other cultures are different, and assuming that your values are valid for a culture as radically different as China's is is simply incorrect. I'm not denying that China's government is doing some pretty nasty things, but simply saying that they're wrong and you're right is a vast oversimplification of the issues.

s/Communism/Authoritarianism

[stinerman]

Maybe then your post is worthy of a +4.

finger every hole in the dike forever

ROFL

Please tell me the pun was intended.

Re:Private VPNs & Proxys?

[garcia]

I mean they can block a few IP adresses by handpicking them but they cannot go ahead and block the whole internet, can they?

Yes, they could and I'm sure that they would if it wouldn't cause the nation to erupt into civil war.

Some small app ala Google WIFI with rolling IPs (in an encrypted list of course) connecting to dynamic hostnames would be too much of a task for the authorities to bear with.

They would outlaw encryption as evidence of crimes against the state and they would track down encrypted radio signals and arrest (and make examples out of) anyone that was doing it. I'm sure it would eliminate *most* attempts at doing this. Enough that it would be a non-issue.

You are really thinking about this the wrong way, as is expected, because you don't understand what it is like to live under a truly repressive regime. Just wait -- you might -- it's starting here already.

Re:Information freed!

[pizzaman100]

You believe it is morally correct to allow people to say what they will, simply because you live in a culture that thinks that is important. Other cultures are different, and assuming that your values are valid for a culture as radically different as China's is is simply incorrect.

According to TFA - people in China are looking for ways to evade the government's web controls. So despite differences in cultures they still value freedom.

Compare Chineese vs. US power structure

[RradRegor]

Both China and the United States are actively trying to "control information" on the internet. Its interesting to me to look at the differences and similarities to see what that says about who has the real power in each country.

In China, what is forbidden is anything that might threaten the obvious power structure of governmnet. In the United States, forbidden information is anything that hurts the profits of a large corporation. Even honest commentary that names the company responsible is effectively impossible here, unless you can afford to fight the charges of slander or trademark infringement in court. The DMCA is another example that's been covered exhaustively elsewhere.

I've heard it said by someone else, and someone please tell me who if you know, that in America we have free speech only as long as it doesn't make any difference to anyone. As soon as what we say has an impact on someone's life or a company's bottom line, then we can't say it anymore. Is that really freedom?

Re:Compare Chineese vs. US power structure

[Rectum2003]

Come on. Slander is NOT free speech. See Slander and Libel. You'll see that saying "Ipod batteries are crap!" is perfectly acceptable.

To compare this to the PRC's attitude towards democracy and free speech really shows bad faith.

Re:Information freed!

[Atzanteol]

This is a bit off-topic, but from that link you provide:

We walked from Lafayette Park to the Guard House at the White House. My sister and I, and other Gold Star Families for Peace members, and some members of Military Families, asked to meet with the President. We again wanted to know: What is the Noble Cause? Our request was, of course, denied. They wouldn't even accept any letters or petitions or pictures of our dead.

WTF did they expect? Protestors are so friggin' self-righteous. "I went to the White House to give the president a quarter I found, and he wouldn't take it! Arrogant jerk!" Don't these people realize they have others who they elect to represent them in congress? Why don't they protest them? All politics are *local*. If you want change you start at city hall, not at the White House. But then there isn't as much press is there...

They were also warned *three friggin' times* to move before they were arrested. Sounds like a publicity stunt to me. It's not like they uttered "I hate the president" while passing a cop and were arrested for "insulting the state" or something. Why didn't they get a permit and then protest legally without being arrested? No headlines, that's why.

Re:Neocons requires information restrictions

[Ranger]

Don't forget the Neocons in charge require communication restriction. No pictures of dead bodies floating in the water of New Orleans, no pictures of the coffins of our servicemen who paid the ultimate price in Iraq and Afghanistan. They put people in jail without communication, without access to lawyers, strip them of their citizenship. They treat prisoners of war in defiance of the principles of the Geneva convention. This is America. How did we become like the Chinese communists? How long has the hunger strike in Guantanamo been going on now? It's easy to be an armchair supporter of freedom of speech. It's very frightening when you exercise it in a country that is heading down a dark path.

"Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job."

it's not blindly accept

[zogger]

Phooie! Lets get real here. Who's "blindly accepting"? We are under painful threat of personal terrorism if we DON'T accept their dictates. Americans know we are getting screwed,you would be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't think this, the deal is, the government will and does use force-at any level-to get their way, up to the point of the barrel of a gun. It is not 'we the people" anymore, it is "us versus them".

Want to go exercise political "free speech" at a rally? If they have decided that speech is ok here but not over there across the street, their armed agents WILL use any amount of force necessary to make you comply. How about "random courtesy roadblocks"? What BS is this, when I was a kid this was taught to us as only something some tyrannical regime pulled, the third reich or stalins soviet union or some place like that, we were shown how utterly bogus that was, because it's true, it IS bogus. Now? What are you supposed to do, NOT STOP? Guess what happens to you if you don't stop, they'll run you off the road or shoot you in the head. How about taxes going through the roof, what do you do about it, taxes and out of control government spending? Vote for the two cooperating political gangs who have hijacked government and make it near impossible for any other party to actually function and get a toe hold in? they have killed off any effective third party action, this is pretty obvious since the reform party actually made a showing. Even took them off the national debates, the League of Women Voters was so disgusted with that blatant power grab that they stopped sponsoring the national debates. A CLUE. How much of "black box" electronic vote hijacking, gerrymandering and skewing the nomination and ballot process has to occur before the government guys doing it arrest themselves, which is what it would take? that just ain't gonna happen, and everyone knows it, and you as joe citizen can't just go and "detain" some governmental crook. They would kill you dead.

We can all see corporate/governmental industry collusion, no bid contracts, blood profits pushed over everything else, yet what are you supposed to actually do about it? You can't stop it physically, you can't vote it away, and any crimes committed by the government are aided and abetted by their armed agents in various colored uniforms. I've been in this gig for decades, for every one little retreat back to the constitution we've seen, we get several large steps forward into despotism.

No the problem is, the government has way too many "just following orders" types who will follow any order given to them, even if they know it is pretty dodgy. And that means both overseas and domestically. Wars based on utter lies and fabrications-still being waged "just following orders". .Look at what they did with hurricane katrina, went WAY out of their way to keep private help and citizens out,walmart trucks with water told to go back, citizen convoys with rescue boats, ordered to go back, civilian communication lines CUT by agents of the feds, on and on, until it had dissolved into chaos, THEN they decide to show up to 'restore order". THIS IS A CLUE. That isn't an "intelligence failure" like that additional 9-11 bigfat lie, it was done on purpose.

Face reality, we have been under a violent armed coup for several years now, just no one really wants to say that out loud too much. check the "hate crimes" bill about to pass, this will affect online and printed and broadcast speech, yet the mass media is mostly ignoring it-wonder why? could it be they are in on it at the top, it's the same technofeudalists who run things, the same elite?

From my perspective, the coup started in earnest when they got clean away with whacking JFK and it has gone downhill from there. A nice slow semi stealth dictatorial take over, every day, establish more command and control and surveillance.

We aren't too many years away from being more like China

Re:it's not blindly accept

[Viper Daimao]

sickening that stuff like, "THIS IS A CLUE. That isn't an "intelligence failure" like that additional 9-11 bigfat lie, it was done on purpose." gets modded insightful, when the parent has no grasp for facts (like the difference between federal and state govt response to katrina) beyond his ranting quasi conspiracy theories of coups and dictatorships.

Re:it's not blindly accept

[Now.Imperfect]

The problem is, you act like some fuckin' revolutionary, when it's your mind set that holds the metaphorical megaphone. Look at hollywood, Mtv, and the whole rest of pop-culture. Almost all of them would agree with you. Does that make it true? Of course not, it just means you live in some jaded world where you're an individual. Take off the painted sunglasses and look around yourself for once.

No protests? I live in Tacoma/Seattle Washington, and I can name two pretty major riots within the last five years.
1) WTO, basically a massive mob of people like you went to "protest" but instead robbed local stores and destroyed private property. THEN police came in to restore order. Now the fact that they were left alone while they protested, and clogged streets during peak business hours, leads me to believe force was only used when they started breaking laws, not because they were practicing free-speech.
2) Marti Gras, another pretty large protest riot, several people were killed when they tried to DEFEND innocents from "protesters with brass-knuckles".

You blame government for the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? I'd agree with you if you didn't blame the federal government! If you knew anything about government you'd know that in emergency situations city is held responsible first, then state, and lastly federal. City government told people to leave, people did not leave, are you gonna blame government because people excersized their freedom?!?! Thats what it sounds like to me.
Next, when federal government offered aid to the governor she said "let me sleep on it".
Another time STATE government failed was in their delay to declare martial law. Mississippi declared it almost immediately, and did you see any looting? No. But the governor of Louisiana says "I don't want any minority hurt or else they'll be mad" so she doesn't declare it for OVER A WEEK. Now, 95% of louisiana is a "minority" if you ask me 95% is a MAJORITY. Hell its over a super majority (2/3). I assure you, if you had the coast guard on every corner with automatic rifles in full gear with the simple command "shoot". Those people would have stopped shooting at the relief helicopters. (Damn, thats stupid if you ask me, 'hey lets shoot the people trying to save us!' they deserve to be killed, remove them from the gene pool for the love of god).
so if anyone should be blamed with the aftermath of hurricane katrina it is the local government, which is composed of the leftists you would seem to identify yourself with.


The only reason you feel like you can equate the american government with the chinese government is because you're an anarchist, and any government is "evil" to you. This stems from the fact that you hate restriction because you like so many other people have been brainwashed to believe that freedom is something that can be taken away. Freedom is perhaps the only thing Sartre was right about when he stated that we are condemned to freedom, that it is inalienable. Government can only advise us on how to use our freedom, it is our choice to conform or to be nonconformist. I for one can't think of anything that is expressly considered illegal that i wish to do, so of course I don't feel any limitation on MY freedom.

Perhaps you just don't get that restrictions can be good.

Of course I do not support the chinese government. And I'm eager to see it topple.

fin.

Re:It's because we live in a liberal society

[technoextreme]

I've heard it said by someone else, and someone please tell me who if you know, that in America we have free speech only as long as it doesn't make any difference to anyone. As soon as what we say has an impact on someone's life or a company's bottom line, then we can't say it anymore. Is that really freedom?

Yeah... That's because we have never lived in a free society. We live in a liberal society (NO NO NO IT BEARS NO RESEMBLENCE TO DEMOCRATS LIBERAL). Essentially, it ammounts to doing whatever you want to without harming other people. If you harm people by what you write (ie slander/libel) then you harm that person's reputation. Read On Liberty by John Stuart Mill. It's a pretty long winded but easy read on the subject.

Re:Information freed!

[Anonymous Coward]

"no US leader in his right mind would attempt to institute a toltarian rule"

I'm not so sure about that. http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/26/bush.milita ry/

Considering that, as Commander in Chief, Bush is effectively in charge of the military... His pushing for more military involvement in the affairs of US citizens seems a bit suspicious.

If he gets his way, all it would take is some dramatic nationwide 'terrorist' threat to bring what would essentially be martial law down on the country.

Of course, you did use the qualifier of "in his right mind" so... This may be apples and oranges. :)

China Has Come a Long Way

[bayers]

Let's not forget how far China has come since Richard Nixon's visit back in the Seventies. Compare 1970's China with modern China and you will see. I am not against gradual change as long as it's constant.

Confucius said something like, 'it doesn't matter how slow you go as long as you don't stop.'

Re:Hurrah!

[AKAImBatman]

PRC Constitution

Some of the more salient articles:

Article 35. Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.

Article 36. Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of religious belief. No state organ, public organization or individual may compel citizens to believe in, or not to believe in, any religion; nor may they discriminate against citizens who believe in, or do not believe in, any religion. The state protects normal religious activities. No one may make use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt public order, impair the health of citizens or interfere with the educational system of the state. Religious bodies and religious affairs are not subject to any foreign domination.

Article 37. The freedom of person of citizens of the People's Republic of China is inviolable. No citizen may be arrested except with the approval or by decision of a people's procuratorate or by decision of a people's court, and arrests must be made by a public security organ. Unlawful deprivation or restriction of citizens' freedom of person by detention or other means is prohibited; and unlawful search of the person of citizens is prohibited. Article 38. The personal dignity of citizens of the People's Republic of China is inviolable. Insult, libel, false charge or frame-up directed against citizens by any means is prohibited.

Article 39. The home of citizens of the People's Republic of China is inviolable. Unlawful search of, or intrusion into, a citizen's home is prohibited.

Article 40. The freedom and privacy of correspondence of citizens of the People's Republic of China are protected by law. No organization or individual may, on any ground, infringe upon the freedom and privacy of citizens' correspondence except in cases where, to meet the needs of state security or of investigation into criminal offences, public security or procuratorial organs are permitted to censor correspondence in accordance with procedures prescribed by law.

Article 41. Citizens of the People's Republic of China have the right to criticize and make suggestions to any state organ or functionary. Citizens have the right to make to relevant state organs complaints and charges against, or exposures of, violation of the law or dereliction of duty by any state organ or functionary; but fabrication or distortion of facts with the intention of libel or frame-up is prohibited. In case of complaints, charges or exposures made by citizens, the state organ concerned must deal with them in a responsible manner after ascertaining the facts. No one may suppress such complaints, charges and exposures, or retaliate against the citizens making them. Citizens who have suffered losses through infringement of their civil rights by any state organ or functionary have the right to compensation in accordance with the law.

Sounds nice, doesn't it? Try this one article on for size, though:

Article 51. The exercise by citizens of the People's Republic of China of their freedoms and rights may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society and of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens.

Note the emphasis, taken from the original document. Nice to have a constitution that doesn't matter to the state, isn't it?

Whats so bad about Interent Censorship?

[RagingChipmunk]

My-oh-my how we whine about the "bad" chinese govt for not allowing their citizens access to crap news sites like CNN. Yet we all shop at Walmart, or Target, who imports so much of their retail items from China.

My-oh-my how we wiggle the accusing finger while wearing the "Made in China" t-shirts. Frankly, the truth is that we really dont care what they do in China, so long as the products remain cheap. I dont care - I have enough problems right here to deal with - Corporate News Censorship is greater than any US govt censorship.

Having been to China, I can tell you that most ppl there dont care either about what sites they can or cant access. A kilometer out of the cities is rural poverty that shocked me even in the light of India or Nepal. These chinese ppl would much rather have clean water, and a sewage system. Maybe hope for rural electricity!

In a perverse way, economic exploitation isnt so bad. The drive to sell more products to the west begrudgingly forces infrastrucure improvements. It draws more ppl to the cities where clean water and sewage exist. I'm not calling for "greed is good" posters, but, doing no business with china would have the tangible effect of setting back the population of worker lifestyle.

So, whats so bad about greed and their own censorship?

Quit trivializing the suffering of the Chinese

[Shivetya]

Your argument is detestable. There is no comparison between the two countries. Your attempt at doing so shows a great amount of ignorance and trivializes the suffering of the Chinese people.

In China the true side effect of getting in the way of the state or a business, which by the way most businesses are the state, is imprisonment or death.

Go look at Amnesty International's 2004 page on China, now tell me how you can truly compare what they do to the US? Freedom of speech? I can go shout at Bush and any member of Congress while in Washington, I can post to a blog, or even buy an ad. I can run anti-corporate web pages here as well as those of accusing the US of atrocity after atrocity without fear of losing my life, having my family disappear, or being imprisoned forever hoping some international group my find me.

Re:Information freed!

[thunderpaws]

It is interesting how you use Cindy Sheehan as an example of our"freedom to speak is declining". This woman is heard throughout the world without any infringment. Look at her words, and those of so many in our country who claim thier rights are diminishing. Their minds are closed and they spew vitriolic rhetoric. Their targeted audience, in this case the Bush administration, simply has no interest in attempting a dialog when there can be no discussion. I would be sympathetic if for example Ms. Sheehan was arrested for her speech rather than creating a public nusiance with out a permit. No one who claims our rights are diminishing is jailed for their speech. While I agree that it is important for their message to be heard openly, I am weary of their uninformed, spoiled brat attitudes. If their "cause" were as real as they claim, they would be more open to meaningful dialog, but their minds are not open.

Re:It's because we live in a liberal society

[fafalone]

Essentially, it ammounts to doing whatever you want to without harming other people.

Except for all the chemicals the government has rather arbitrarily decided you aren't allowed to put into your own body. And you can't break encryption to watch media you bought on other platforms. And you can't download stuff that's no longer available to purchase. And you can't drive without wearing your seatbelt. And... you get the point. And the current religious right in power is moving towards placing even more restrictions on what consenting adults can and cannot do.

Re:How fitting...

[MightyMartian]

Wall Street Journal, eh? Yahoo and Google feeling the heat because they bow to an oppressive regime, so now come out the happy "Hey Hey, it's okay, the Chinese surf the Net anyways! Oh yeah, and the major portals are helping, so everything is just fine in China."

The timing of this after all the revelations as to Corporate America's whoring itself to tyrannical technocrats is more than a little suspicious.

Re:Lost war

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Please, don't jump to the conclusion that I want oppressive governments or dictators. All I'm saying is that China can be (IS) the next economic superpower without the civil liberties or political models of the West. Most people don't know what real freedom is, nor do they care if they have enough 'freedom' to have fun and live a 'no worries' life.

I've got to say that you're really hitting the nail on the head here. For years I thought that only through democracy and personal freedoms could a state advance itself, socially and technologically. I would have cited the migrations of academics and scientists from facist regimes in the 30s and 40s, as well as the general social decline of these regiemes as evidence of this.

However, at a glance, China appears to be advancing without democracy and civil rights. It's a frightening thought that the chinese communist party may have found a way to have their cake and eat it too, by becoming an economic superpower while still maintaining authoritarianism. It is worth noting that ~800 million chinese are not benefiting from this growth. Still china is advancing in leaps and bounds in nearly every sphere but civil rights.

If the party's model proves successful, how long before industrialists and polititians in the west begin pioneering this new approach, and we all begin to slide back into unashamed plutocracy? I worry that the values of the enlightenment are in danger of being rolled back by the very technologies they have help to create. I'm not a luddite by any manner or means, but I think a lot of modern technology has made tyranny a much easier business.

I took the gas...

[zogger]

....walking with people who just wanted to VOTE, and had their rights denied. I took the gas when we wanted open honest debate and actual facts and data over a war fought but never legally declared, a war for blood profits, partially fought with chemical weapons that were killing our own guys and still do to this day. And MOST of those guys were very poor young folks who got dragooned into it against their will, while the fatcats sons got student 2s deferrments or cushy national guard non-jobs, like a certain smirker in chief.

  I watched as a group of cops picked someone who was non violent, just yelling, out of a crowd and STOMPED AND BEAT HIM TO DEATH at a rally AND IT NEVER MADE THE NEWS. they were laughing while they did it, LAUGHING. Kent state made the news, jackson state did, this incident didn't, and there have been a lot more over the years, just not reported or barely reported or excused off for some vague double speak reason. I, and several other people took that case as eyewitnesses as far as we could, to a lieutenant governor meeting, IT STILL RESULTED IN NOTHING HAPPENING. They hauled the poor guys body away and wouldn't even admit it happened.

THAT is partially from where I am coming from. Don't assume things about people you don't know. just because nation x is worse than nation y doesn't mean nation y doesn't have uber sucky aspects to it of the dictatorial goon squad nature. This is a government that has a past verifiable track record of foreign official assassinations, support for death squads, cozying up to dictators or helping install them, and utterly wasting most of the money they get from the tax payers with a shrug,a wink and a nod to "business as usual".

My goal is somehow work so that it never gets worse than what it is! And somehow this is wrong because some other place it's even worse?? Sorry, no one controls where they are born, but we all have a stake in where we live, to try and make it better and you can't do that unless you are able to actually LOOK and see where the faults are. I have done this, did it, and will continue to do so. My commentary was on the 'americans blindly accepting' part, some of us don't 'blindly accept' matters we know are just plain evil wrong, but we also are aware of the consequences of actions in todays political world. If we don't push back when it's so called 'not that bad", then GUARANTEED they will keep pushing until you and me and thee and thou are squashed flat eyes downcast shuffling slaves.

$%^&*( that, homey don't play that game

Where do you come from?

[lemaymd]

That the parent scored 5: insightful after claiming America is run by armed dictators that purposely drowned N.O. makes me wonder where slashdot's moderators come from. This is a meaningless conspiracy theory.

Robbed of their freedom? Really?

[Elad Alon]

Maybe this is exactly what people want? Maybe we (as in the royal "you" if you think this doesn't apply to other countries, to differing extents) aren't really interested in "freedom" as much as we (as in the actual "me and you") would like to think. Bread, circuses and the ability to lead extremely safe lives without the need to think to much, these may be what most people really want. Maybe they're not being robbed of their less commonly used freedoms, maybe they're trading them away?