Slashdot Mirror
China Unblocks Wikipedia
ZZeta writes "Even though the information on the site is still scarce, Editor & Publisher is already publishing the scoop: Apparently, Wikipedia has been unblocked in China. From the article: 'Wikipedia reported on its site that it had received word from multiple users in the country on Chinese-forums.com that the site had been restored.'"
But I wonder if people in China who choose to visit certain articles might get tagged and investigated (like people in the United States do under the Patriot Act for checking out certain books from the library).
Yep, I too can confirm the site is accessible from inside China.
"Opening up their economy, moving towards capitalism are some of the bigger steps. Allowing wikipedia is a good step in the right direction."
Those are two very interesting 'remarks'...not sure where to start, as you've taken some fairly significant liberties, speaking as you do, and not being one of 'them'.
To begin, how do you know what is the 'right direction' for the Chinese? Are you sure that your definition would be widely embraced by the Chinese?
Moving along, you casually comment about 'opening up'. Opening something depends on that something already existing. You speak as if it is already in place, and what is happening now is simply broad access in and out. China is a 'developing country'. I believe there is a major difference between 'opening up' and 'developing', especially in regards to something so unique as China's economy. Next, you flatly state 'moving towards capitalism' - I doubt anyone would be comfortable proposing that what is happening is that simple. Moving, yes...but China is in a position of moving 'away' from many things, rather than 'towards' your definition of anything. The Chinese themselves are not clear on what China is moving 'towards'... an outside, casual observer, such as yourself, is that much more incapable of making any type of valid claim. I would suggest that rather than serving up your distant opinions, that you come here and ask them in person.
My point is that your comments speak more of what you don't know, as opposed to what you think you know. How can you claim to speak for them...? I don't get it, sorry.
"I believe the more communication the better..."
The better for whom? Again, I'm left wondering what makes you think you understand the situation. You talk about 'communication' as if all forms of it are good. I know you are trying to frame your points humanistically, however, without looking at what 'communication' means to the Chinese, as opposed to this or that other culture, ignores just one part of their uniqueness.
I urge you to consider that you and many others will soon be judging what the internet is and does using China as the norm, not the exception. I am fairly sure your hubris is in for a shock when you learn that you don't define such things to the Chinese, when in fact they are even now defining it for you... Come on over, I'll be happy to help you find a front row seat to a very interesting time in human history.
Consider that before the Renaissance (which you blow off as "very few rich aristocrats in 14th and 15th century Europe") Europe, and "white people," were pretty backwards. My ancestors were part of the the Gupta Empire, then the Ottoman Empire, and many others. In general, these empires were technologically and culuturally "superior" to European empires. That is to say, relatively speaking, we enjoyed a higher level of comfort, less starvation, less disease, and more free time to just think.
After the Renaissance, Europe re-discovered art and science and began an explosion of ideas that, basically, let it conquer the world. These weren't rich aristocrats. These were geniuses. The likes of Michaelangelo and Galileo. You have to ask yourself, if those values were so stupid and so useless, how did they manage to lord over the world (and maybe, still do)?
My conclusion is: their system works. Copy it. Of course, that's what I get out of it. Does this mean there isn't a better set of values and a better system? No -- there may very well be a set of ideals that are far better... i.e. leading to better quality of life. China would be wise to not ignore these values wholesale, and as a matter of fact, they're not. It's why they've privatized their markets. It has made them much, much wealthier. Can political freedoms be better for them, as well? History, if it's any guide, seems to indicate a definite yes.
Lastly, you may think: well, it may have worked well for Europe but who's to say it will work a different culture? Because the Chinese are not aliens. They are human beings, where even cultural whims, are led by evolution and nature. I mean, are the Europeans so special that they would find a system that only works for them? Capitalism in moderation, rule by the people, scientific inquiry, and basic freedoms (press, religion, speech; naturally, with limitations) are the best tools we have and for all intents and purposes nothing has ever shown to work better.
My own mother country is waking up and realizing that these are not "inventions" as much as they are discoveries, and they can be put to use now for a better livelihood while working on something "better".
Boycott Sony