China Blocks iTunes

eldavojohn writes "If you like iTunes and you are one of the billion people residing in China, you may have noticed that you no longer have access to the eight million songs on it. An album, 'Songs for Tibet' was downloaded more than 40 times by Olympic athletes as a sign of solidarity for Tibet's cause. Ironically, this compilation had songs criticizing the 'Great Firewall of China,' and that is the very thing that prohibited these songs from reaching the Chinese public. Artists on the compilation include Alanis Morissette, Garbage, Imogen Heap, Moby, Sting, Suzanne Vega, Underworld and others." Additional coverage is available at Computerworld. Earlier this year, China blocked Youtube and other video services for similar reasons. More recently, the Chinese government detained a technologist who planned a pro-Tibet demonstration.

Comments

this is getting interesting

[extirpater]

One day China's great firewall will block itself because it includes word "tibet" in it's blocking rules.

Re:this is getting interesting

[sethstorm]

Include Tibet(as well as things that would keep the developing world out) as a major part of an mmo. Their own country won't let them play the game.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Asic Eng]

Well maybe that's one way of circumventing the great firewall - just have Tibet-protests on just about any website of interest. Eventually they'd have the choice of pulling the plug on either the firewall or the internet connection itself.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Workaround: match "t" + "i" + "b" + "e" + "t" instead.

Re:this is getting interesting

[MightyYar]

Oooo! Or, we could fill up Tienanmen square with peaceful people in protest. Then they'd have the choice of listening to us or just mowing us all down.

Re:this is getting interesting

[jez9999]

They'd pull the internet connection; don't kid yourself.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Lachlan Hunt]

No, if you RTFA, you'll see that it's China who have blocked access to it. Ordinarily, it's possible to access any localised iTunes store from anywhere in the world. That's why I can buy from the Australian iTunes store, even though I'm currently overseas. So Americans who are in China should be able to purchase from the USA store.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Fred_A]

Oooo! Or, we could fill up Tienanmen square with peaceful people in protest.

No, this is bound to work :
"'Songs for Tibet' was downloaded more than 40 times by Olympic athletes as a sign of solidarity for Tibet's cause"

If this doesn't make the world take the notice, nothing will. I mean *40 times*, that's probably as many as 40 people. Downloading an album from iTunes. Now *that's* solidarity !

Take that China !

Re:this is getting interesting

[Rhapsody Scarlet]

They'd pull the internet connection; don't kid yourself.

So they either give up the firewall and open up, or kill the internet access entirely and cut themselves off from what has proven to be the single most important invention of recent years. It's lose-lose for them, and win-win for us. What have we got to lose?

Re:this is getting interesting

[MightyYar]

I wonder what that is as a percentage of Olympic athletes?

Obviously, with 500 reviews the album has been downloaded more than 40 times in total.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

"Guantanamera" Is that some kind of band?

Seriously dude. The only thing that make China EVIL is its GOVERNMENT. It's called COMMUNIST China. You know, the political theory that brought you hundreds of millions dead throughout the world.

So it's not at all hard to believe that they are so insecure and petty as to ban iTunes after just 40 downloads.

Next thing you know, they will be CHEATING in the Olympic games by fielding underaged gymnists.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Bonobo_Unknown]

China's evil is beyond communism, it's the worst of capitalism (profit is the most important value) socialism (complete government control) and fascism (persecution of minorities and group-think).
Communism in it's true form is more akin to anarchism - it's never been seen to work because it's never really been tried...

Re:this is getting interesting

[pushing-robot]

Money.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

Include Tibet(as well as things that would keep the developing world out) as a major part of an mmo. Their own country won't let them play the game.

Hmm.. I couldn't tell if that was a remark on gold farmers and wanting to do away with them or an actual intelligent comment in that the best way to force revolution is to take away things the masses of public are addicted to.

Would MMO (WoW) be the Chinese version of "let them eat Cake!"? Given MMO's don't effect just masses of people but businesses as well. I'm not sure there's enough players in China for it. South Korea, there's another story. But those are also two very different countries.

Re:this is getting interesting

[ssintercept]

Communism in its true form is more like the Amish. Start reading your Marx and Engels - the roots of Anarchism and Communism: http://www.marxists.org/subject/anarchism/index.htm
early Communists and Anarchists sought to preserve the communal lands and communal lifestyle, but also sought to overthrow the feudal aristocracy to establish democracy, this made them both progressive and conservative. more on the Amish see: http://people.howstuffworks.com/amish.htm

Many of these groups opposed progress, and some participated in riots, the destruction of industrial machines, and the sabotage of factories. This was done because the new industrial forms of production were undermining rural life and were putting millions of craftsmen out of work by making their skills no longer valuable. Then Karl Marx came along in the mid 1800s and Marx denounced the "utopian socialism" and anti-progress communism of his day. Marx pointed out that capitalism was progressive because it represented an improvement in production. Marx hailed capitalism's triumph as a victory over feudalism. Marx said that industrialization was a good thing and that it should be embraced, that instead of opposing the progress of industrialization the goal should be to end wage-labor, and that the new industrial systems should be converted to communal property, much like the lands had been communal property just some 50 or 100 years prior. This changed the communist movement from being anti-technology to pro-technology, and led to the development of what most people recognize today as "Communist ideology". The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848 by Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels, and can be found here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm It is important to distinguish the difference between Communism and Marxism. Marxism is basically a system of analysis, and a way to view the world. Communism, on the other hand, is basically a political movement, a form of government, a condition of society. It is also important to understand the difference between "communism" and the Communist Party. No country has ever had a communist system of government. The countries that we call "Communist" are countries where the dominant political party was/is the Communist Party. Communist Parties are generally political parties who have working towards achieving "communism" as part of their party platform. However, we all know the maxims on power and its corrupting allure.

Re:this is getting interesting

[S.O.B.]

Communism in it's true form is more akin to anarchism

You might want to do a little reading before making statements like that.

Anarchism is a "political philosophy encompassing theories and attitudes which support the elimination of all compulsory government". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

Communism is a "socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production and property in general". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Anarchism and communism are about as "akin" as apples and kangaroos.

Re:this is getting interesting

[hey!]

One day China's great firewall will block itself because it includes word "tibet" in it's blocking rules.

Where have you gone, Mr. Spock?

A nation turns it's lonely eyes to you...

Re:this is getting interesting

[BrokenHalo]

Communism in it's true form is more akin to anarchism[sic] - it's never been seen to work because it's never really been tried...

Indeed, well said. This is why, although I've always been a "leftie", I've never called myself a Marxist.

In my experience, the only people who call themselves Marzists are those who have never actually read any Marx, and thus I am excluded. But anarchy would be an attractive alternative to our current situation if we could find a way to keep the big corporations from barging in and filling the gaps vacated by governments. Now that would be really ugly...

I can see a flamewar starting here, so I should mention that my ruminations are largely a product of imagination and thought experiments, so keep it civil if you don't mind...

Re:this is getting interesting

[BrokenHalo]

If you tried basing your suppositions upon the original documents, rather than Wikipedia's potted versions, you might arrive at different conclusions.

Wikipedia is great for lots of things, and in general I applaud it, but it does tend to encourage sloppy thinking.

Re:this is getting interesting

[initialE]

Step 1: declare a song for Tibet as your (temporary) national anthem
Step 2: win olympic gold ...

Re:this is getting interesting

[iknowcss]

Spam :)

Re:this is getting interesting

[Kopiok]

I don't think he was saying that they were the same thing, just that they've both have "never really been tried".

Re:this is getting interesting

[pherthyl]

[quote]So they either give up the firewall and open up, or kill the internet access entirely and cut themselves off from what has proven to be the single most important invention of recent years.[/quote]

You seem to think that the internet is a western thing. Well I've got news for you, China has the biggest group of internet users in the world (over 220 million) and if they cut off all outside access, they would still have an internal internet with a massive ammount of information on it. They don't need google or gmail or msn or any of the websites that we use from day to day, because they have their own equivalents (Baidu runs a lot of services).

Sure they would lose a lot of information, but they would still have access to an internet and all the communication benefits of that.

Re:this is getting interesting

[S.O.B.]

Having studied political science and economics the statements I quoted do capture the essence of communism and anarchism accurately enough for the purposes of this discussion. My goal was not to provide an in depth contrast and comparison of those two concepts. If that's what you're looking for or expect then I suggest you find a site dedicated to discussion of political/economic theories.

As to you comments on my choice of Wikipedia as a source, if you can find sources that you believe are more accurate and contradict the quotes I provided then I encourage you to post them. I have no problem with constructive criticism but if you're going to criticize the source then you could at least back it up.

Re:this is getting interesting

[v1]

I rather doubt they would have any qualms whatsoever about blocking the majority of the internet 'for reasons of national interest'.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia ... iTunes blocks you!

Re:this is getting interesting

[gullevek]

theoretically yes, but as china does tons of production for outside companies, etc I doubt they would do that, they would cut of the money stream ...

Re:this is getting interesting

[Me! Me! 42]

Just yesterday, on TV, I saw the figure of (roughly) 10,000 olympic athletes competing in Beijing at this olympic (a surprisingly large number I thought.)
So that would be roughly 0.4% of competing olympic athletes.
Of course you would need to consider that Chinese athletes are unlikely to participate, even if they wanted to.
Most athletes from all countries would prefer not to make any waves or stir up controversy.
Most people have no idea of where Tibet is or what has happened there since 1950.
Most people just don't care.
etc.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

One day China's great firewall will block itself because it includes word "tibet" in it's blocking rules.

I can access iTunes just fine. I'm in China right now for the closing of the Beijing Olympics.... yes.. I read this article... and yes... I iTunes works fine for me.

Re:this is getting interesting

[aliquis]

It's some snowy mountain area where Tintin have an adventure!

Re:this is getting interesting

[aliquis]

Yeah, because if you want to order 10 million mp3 players or 2 million tn panels you can't do it by telephone, mail or in person? :D

Anyone, doesn't matter, of course they won't turn of their Internet access, and people won't type about Tiber everywhere.

Re:this is getting interesting

[Uncreative]

Some people (me included) interpret Karl Marx's work to state that the end form of communism is Utopian anarchism. I think this is what he is talking about. But yeah, like someone else said, I think he meant they are akin because they have both have never been tried.

Re:this is getting interesting

[sethstorm]

There are plenty of other non-developing countries for which to deal. Then again, we do have our own country to fix first.

Re:this is getting interesting

[S.O.B.]

After rereading the GP I think you're interpretation of the intention is correct although the use of "akin" is not. Neither of them being tried does not make them "akin" or related. If that were true then landing on Mars would be akin to fighting a war with an egg beater. :D

Re:this is getting interesting

[gullevek]

you really think thats the only thing that goes over the internet? Banking transfers, order updates, shipping orders, etc. Do you think they will send a FAX to the china factory for the MacPro, etc?

Re:this is getting interesting

[atraintocry]

God only knows how many tons of spam that firewall is holding back...it's not win-win when no one can email anymore :)

Re:this is getting interesting

[Bonobo_Unknown]

Some people (me included) interpret Karl Marx's work to state that the end form of communism is Utopian anarchism. I think this is what he is talking about. But yeah, like someone else said, I think he meant they are akin because they have both have never been tried.

I meant what you said, Communism as Utopian Anarchism, the never been tried thing was meant to show that none of the purported Communist governments have ever made it past the Socialist phase.

Re:this is getting interesting

[raddan]

He's not saying they're the same. He's saying that they have their roots in the same idea. That idea is, as far as is practical, the elimination of a ruling class and the fullest actualization of human freedom. How they differ is in what extent they consider to be practical. Anarchists are the ultimate capitalists: let natural human behavior self-regulate, i.e., there is no government (or, at least, no compulsory government). Communists believe that compulsory government is still necessary, but should only exist insofar as it helps to bring about the communist ideal of freedom.

You're focusing too much on labels here: a "political philosophy" thus implemented becomes a socioeconomic structure. China calls its political philosophy "communism", but anyone can see that China's socioeconomic structure is anything but. Calling itself "communist" is simply political theatre.

Re:this is getting interesting

[arekusu_ou]

It's ridiculous the knee-jerk reaction we get to China. A bunch of "children" flaunt at the adult's rules and go "na na na, look at me, I'm playing with something that you told me not to". And the adult takes the thing away from the child. And to assert their authority, they broaden the punishment, "just because you flaunted yourself at me, I'll take away the other toys too".
In an earlier Tibet thread, I posted a history lesson about China/Tibet. http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=643307&cid=24594219
You may not like, China for censorship and filtering, but look at your own government first, it's just varying degrees of the same thing. You may not like them using violence to put down dissidents to their national peace, but again, look at your own government. You may not like them for not granting Tibet their independence, but who are you to demand another country give into that? I'd be amused if Hawaii gets a clue and demand their independence and kick the white men off their property.
It's their way of running their country, and may be different from what we consider normal, but your hypocrisy reeks coming from a "Tolerance to different ways of doing things" and then demanding they not do things the way they are.
Every society has differing standards of morals, differing priorities, and differing national interest.
Where as the US may block stuff because it deems them too violent, or too provocative, or too sexual, bad for societal morale. They blocked pro-tibet things because they deemed it objectionable and I think it's frankly insulting. I'm sure the block on all of Itunes is temporary and once they figure out how to block specific songs, they'll release the block on all of Itunes.

To be fair to China

[MrHanky]

Blocking an album containing Alanis Morissette, Garbage, Moby and Sting is probably preventing human rights violations as much as it contributes to them. Isn't that ironic?

Re:To be fair to China

[tyle]

Blocking an album containing Alanis Morissette, Garbage, Moby and Sting is probably preventing human rights violations as much as it contributes to them. Isn't that ironic?

It's like rain on your wedding day, It's a free ride when you've already paid, It's the good advice that you just didn't take, Who would've thought ... it figures

Re:To be fair to China

[earthbound kid]

In fairness to China, they make the iPod, so they should get a veto over what crap people listen to on it.

Re:To be fair to China

[NoPantsJim]

Isn't that ironic?

...Don't ya think?

Re:To be fair to China

[Turnpike Lad]

The Great Firewall of China blocking a song that criticizes the Great Firewall of China is not ironic. It would be ironic if the Great Firewall of China blocked a song that _praised_ the Great Firewall of China.

Re:To be fair to China

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope Sting realizes that we all share the same biology,
regardless of ideology. Hasn't he wondered if the Chinese love their children too?

Re:To be fair to China

[thekobart]

Aku tidak mngerti, mengapa mereka memblok itunes. Apakah karena lagu-lagu yang tidak sesuai dengan selera pemerintah cina? Aneh sekali

Re:To be fair to China

[zippthorne]

And yet, you still bothered to memorize lyrics from the song.

Re:To be fair to China

[chubs730]

I'll give you a small woosh here. Ironic was on old Alanis Morissette song that epitomizes the misuse of the word ironic.

Re:To be fair to China

[jhol13]

Or maybe they just do not like DRM.

Look on the bright side

[Miladinoski]

They won't be able to buy Apple's DRM protected music. Boo hoo Apple.

Re:Look on the bright side

[Anonymous Coward]

They won't be able to buy Apple's DRM protected music. Boo hoo Apple.

To be fair, the iTunes store also sells non-DRM music, you stupid cunt.

iTunes != iTunes Store

[Dare]

Shouldn't that be "China Blocks iTunes Store"? What is this, Internet News by Joe Sixpack?

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[Yvanhoe]

An interestingly accurate definition of most /. summaries...
Still a great selection of poorly summed-up news.

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't that be "China Blocks iTunes Store"? What is this, Internet News by Joe Sixpack?

If it's redneck news shouldn't that be "Chinar Blocs Itunes Storr"?

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[El Icaro]

You realize you can pick to not install Safari right? Though they do advertise it as recommended.

Quicktime contains Apple's own codecs for music / media playing that iTunes uses. They really should bundle them separately, but i can just choose not to use them and i'm fine.

Not to mention, iTunes is still waaay better to organize large collections of music than any other app. I love the way they layout the files in the music directory, makes moving it so much easier.

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[Anpheus]

Safari marks itself to be installed -every single damn time-. I have to uncheck the box every time.

Yeah that pisses me off.

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[Anonymous Coward]

Amarok?

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[stewbacca]

Unless of course you have a Mac...

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[ozphx]

Its not as bad as bloody Java UPDATES trying to sneak the google toolbar in. :(

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[entrylevel]

...In which case Safari is a core part of the system that cannot be removed without breaking software that relies on the rendering engine, just like MSIE on Windows.

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you Apple apologists? I have used Apple products since I was 4 and have a MBP paid for by my job. Still you have to admit it, iTunes sucks (on any platform) and Apple is getting awful damn predatory.

This is directed at "El Icaro" just as much as it was the post I am replying to. Get some fucking perspective!

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[Aaron5367]

Shouldn't that be "China Blocks iTunes Store"? What is this, Internet News by Joe Sixpack?

Hello, You must be new here!

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[stewbacca]

iTunes (on the Mac) is great--nothing apologist about that.

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[HappySmileMan]

It's only funny is they weren't around a million users before you. Though right now I'm correcting you despite being newer... Maybe I'm wrong, in a few weeks I should look back and see what I think of it then

Re:iTunes != iTunes Store

[El Icaro]

Er, just drag it into the trash to uninstall, the webkit libraries (or whatever) are somewhere else on the system. Stuff still works. Same with iTunes, or whatever else comes pre-installed.

Also, I have no issues with IE being preinstalled. If it didn't i couldn't download firefox :)

Every country has a different threshold

[burnitdown]

We ban child porn and bomb making instructions, they ban bad music that criticizes the government.

If anything they should be consistent and just ban bad music.

How is it our place to criticize them? A country should be able to make decisions about what ideas it tolerates within its borders. Not all countries will make the same decision.

Not everyone agrees with us enlightened, progressive, "free" Westerners. Get over it and get over yourselves. There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[saihung]

They have the power to kill free debate and discussion within their borders. That's true. They have the power to murder Tibetans and then tell the rest of the country that Tibetans are very happy to be part of China, on pain of imprisonment.

But as a free people, we have the right to point and them and call them cowards. That's about our freedom to call it like we see it. As long as there is freedom of speech anywhere in the world, then no one has the "right" to not have their evil discussed abroad.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Asic Eng]

How is it our place to criticize them? A country should be able to make decisions about what ideas it tolerates within its borders. Not all countries will make the same decision.

So we should accept another country's right to censorship because that's the moral thing to do? How come that moral concept is universal, and the moral concept of human rights is not? I don't see how that position makes sense.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure the Chinese people have all the freedom they could wish for to criticise the American government as well. That's not about freedom, and what you're describing isn't about freedom. Does that mean you're unfree, or just that you're an idiot?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

How is it our place to criticize them? A country should be able to make decisions about what ideas it tolerates within its borders. Not all countries will make the same decision. Not everyone agrees with us enlightened, progressive, "free" Westerners. Get over it and get over yourselves. There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!

There you have a perfect example of a moral relativist. Doesn't make much sense when you look at it closely, does it? I truly feel sorry for him. What a sad life he must lead.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

How is it our place to criticize them?

Because we are free people. If you don't like being around free people, then you should move to a fascist country, like China.

There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!

No, but theirs definitely isn't.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[netcrusher88]

Two things to note:

Number one, we don't ban bomb making instructions. Google "Anarchist's Cookbook". Get your facts straight before attempting to troll.

Number two, the ban on child pornography is not because the porn itself is obscene, it is because its production is harmful. See this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition#Majority_opinion

Laws prohibiting the distribution and possession of child pornography ban speech because of the manner in which it is produced, regardless of its serious literary or artistic value.

If you don't understand how this is different from China blocking all of iTMS because a handful of songs protested their takeover and violent suppression of a sovereign nation, by all means emigrate to China.

Please no comparing Tibet to Iraq here. One might recall that we're in the final stages of talks with Iraq to fully remove American troops over time (having already handed over control of the nation to the new government), where China refuses to recognize the existence of Tibet as a separate culture and violently suppresses any suggestion that they do. Go ahead and see what happens when you walk down the street in DC with a tape of Iraq war protest songs in a ghetto blaster. Hint: odd looks, but nothing else.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Asic Eng]

How brave, I think foreign leaders will be impressed and change their evil ways.

*shrug* - the apartheid regime owes it's downfall partly due to economic sanctions by the western world. You can't achieve everything just by getting public opinion in the west on your side. But the western world is powerful, and public opinion is a powerful factor in the western world.

You are right that you don't have to be brave to protest for Tibet while living in the US, you just have to be willing to get of your butt. So what?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[guyminuslife]

Gah, I hate getting roped into bickering on the Internet (which is different from arguing), but that just irritated me so much I have to respond before someone Godwins this thread.

"A country should be able to make decisions about what ideas it tolerates within its borders."

If you take the liberal constitutional approach, the one with all the founding fathers and such, no, absolutely not. If you take the ancient Athenian view, the one that killed Socrates, then yes, but only under a democratic government. Since the Chinese government is not democratically elected or accountable to "the people," you're conflating the "country" with the "people in power." That's okay, I guess, as long as you have some rationale for determining the legitimacy of the Chinese regime. Is that justification simply that the people in power have a right to speak for the country simply because they were able to pull themselves up to the top---e.g., might makes right? As far as I know that particular sophistry was debunked thousands of years ago (again, see Socrates). Is there some sort of divine authority that legitimizes the CCP's authority---doubtful, since they're atheistic. Capitalism has taken hold with a vengeance in China, so I guess Marxism's out the door. So what's the source of the Chinese government's "right" to do anything?

"There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!"

That might be because ethics does not pose any scientific questions. But maybe you're right; as long as there's one guy out there who doesn't agree with us, we should all abandon our principles for fear of offending his sensibilities.

Okay, that was horrible.

Nazis.
Nazis.
Nazis.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Bazman]

I'm having trouble finding out what treaties and conventions the Chinese government has actually ratified or signed, but when they say they will - or will work towards - abiding by this or that UN Human Rights agreement, then yes, it is our business.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2005_Sept_5/ai_n15403393

  "The covenant is a 29-year-old agreement that calls on nations to let their people freely determine their political status and not be arbitrarily arrested. China signed the agreement in 1998, but has not ratified it."

  I'm quite happy for them to torture, murder, enslave, and restrict the activities of their own people as much as they like as long as they admit it. No problem. But when they say 'oh, we're nice people really' and carry on, well then I just CANT STAND hypocrisy....

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[flyingsquid]

Not everyone agrees with us enlightened, progressive, "free" Westerners. Get over it and get over yourselves. There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!

The West kicked the ass of the totalitarian regimes of Nazi Germany and Italy in WWII, and then watched communism crumble into the ground. Politically free, free market societies simply tend to do better in the long run than repressive, totalitarian societies. Or look at the Arab dictatorships of the Middle East: sure, a lot of them are wealthy, but they're basically all failures. In scientific terms they have produced nothing, in economic terms they produce nothing except oil, and in military terms, none of them could take on Israel in a fight.

Suppressing political discourse and reporting basically means that the government is no longer accountable for its failures. For instance, if a family protests the fact that a school collapsed in an earthquake and killed their daughter, and you arrest the family (which is the kind of shit the Chinese government is currently doing), well sure it helps the government maintain control. But it also means that the corrupt people who built the substandard schools go free and the problem doesn't get fixed. Perhaps you get stability, but in the long run the lack of government accountability means that the system lacks the ability to improve itself and adapt to changing conditions. Basically, you're saying that the ideas and opinions of 99% of your population aren't worth listening to. That's just a stupid way to run a society. And keep in mind that for all of China's impressive economic growth, the vast majority of the country is still dirt poor. They've managed to create a middle and upper class, but it remains to be seen whether the rest of the country can share in the gains.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Nullav]

How is it your place to claim a massive tract of land and treat those born on it like property, setting down arbitrary rules and taxing them because they popped out of the wrong vagina? Countries exist for the good of their citizens; to maintain order and to promote the intellectual progress and well-being of those living there, not to provide cheap labor/praise for a select ruling class.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[cloakable]

Actually it makes perfect sense to me.

I'm English. I therefore don't have the right to carry a firearm. This would probably cause (possibly armed) riots in the streets over in the USA. Me? I'm perfectly happy not carrying one, and knowing that the people I see aren't going to be carrying one.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[TheRaven64]

We should in theory, but only if people are free (both politically and economically) to leave the country at will. If people choose to live in a totalitarian state, then I don't have a problem with it, but somewhere like China has strict controls on emigration and a population so large that if a sizeable proportion of them wanted to leave the rest of the world couldn't easily accommodate them.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[BitterOldGUy]

I hate getting roped into bickering on the Internet..

That's why I find that spewing complete nonsense, with some kernel fact and truth, therapeutic. I think if I get good enough, I may get an editorial job at CNN or Fox News.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[penix1]

In scientific terms they have produced nothing, in economic terms they produce nothing except oil, and in military terms, none of them could take on Israel in a fight.

To be fair, the only reason Israel is still on the map is because of US military support. Israel couldn't defend itself without the arms, both conventional and nuclear, that the US gives them. And since you are going on about production, what exactly has Israel produced for the world except a continued source of strife in the middle east? It is the continued support the US gives to Israel, even when Israel is the aggressor, that is the real root cause of much anti-US sentiments in the middle east.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless they're criminals. :P

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[kaos07]

How the hell is this "Insightful". There's a gaping flaw in the premise.

Politically free, free market societies simply tend to do better in the long run than repressive, totalitarian societies.

Oh yeah? You want to give me a few examples of "Politically free, free market societies" that don't "suppress political discourse"? You can't do it. Countries that were once beacons of "liberal-democratic" hope like the UK and the US have become riddled with censorship, political repression and eroding human and civil rights. Other countries that have managed to a certain extent to keep some of these liberal principles aren't really "free market". Then again, it's pretty easy to construct a case showing that no country on the planet is "free market".

What's even funnier is that you start talking about how we in "The West" hold the government to account for its failures. Have you been reading some of the Slashdot articles of the past seven years?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Andrew-Unit]

Or look at the Arab dictatorships of the Middle East: sure, a lot of them are wealthy, but they're basically all failures. In scientific terms they have produced nothing, in economic terms they produce nothing except oil, and in military terms, none of them could take on Israel in a fight.

Let's not get excited and go overboard.

The region of Iraq was historically known as Mesopotamia (Greek: "between the rivers"). It was home to the world's first known civilization, the Sumerian culture, followed by the Akkadian, Babylonian, and Assyrian cultures, whose influence extended into neighboring regions as early as 5000 BC. These civilizations produced some of the earliest writing and some of the first sciences, mathematics, laws and philosophies of the world; hence its common epithet, the "Cradle of Civilization"

Also read a bit about the Islamic Golden Age beginning in the 8th century.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[FishWithAHammer]

The rate of gun crime in England didn't exactly go down when the legal guns were taken away. If you take away the legal firearms, only the criminals (and the people who you have tacitly accepted as your civil masters, the police) will have access to them.

You don't know that the people you see won't be armed. You hope they won't be. Saying anything else is cowardly, self-important self-delusion.

Pathetic, as are all moral relativists.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm having trouble finding out what treaties and conventions the Chinese government has actually ratified or signed, but when they say they will - or will work towards - abiding by this or that UN Human Rights agreement, then yes, it is our business.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2005_Sept_5/ai_n15403393

  "The covenant is a 29-year-old agreement that calls on nations to let their people freely determine their political status and not be arbitrarily arrested. China signed the agreement in 1998, but has not ratified it."

  I'm quite happy for them to torture, murder, enslave, and restrict the activities of their own people as much as they like as long as they admit it. No problem. But when they say 'oh, we're nice people really' and carry on, well then I just CANT STAND hypocrisy....

So you are willing to just stand by and allow human rights violations to happen? You are willing to allow them to commit mass murder (see the Cultural Revolution as a superb example) and say nothing, let them conquer a neighboring nation, suppress its religious and other freedoms if they simply admit it?

Wow.

What part of "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." did you miss in Civics class?

And what part of your human compassion circuitry got damaged when your parents dropped you on your head as an infant?

For the record, China is a signatory to the United Nations, which means it is also a signatory to UNESCO, which provides relief and aid to children in disaster areas - and oppressed states, including Tibet!

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sycodon]

Too bad, because then everyone brings a knife to a knife fight.

But that's OK, they've banned knifes now haven't they?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sycodon]

Last I read, Israel has been on the defensive in every war. If everyone would quit blowing up the women and children, shooting rockets at them, or outright sending in their armies into Israel, things would be a lot quieter over there.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[rufus t firefly]

And since you are going on about production, what exactly has Israel produced for the world except a continued source of strife in the middle east?

You forgot irrigation expertise, which they export to many other countries. Not exactly bananas, though.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

The U.S. has the power to murder natives (e.g. Wounded Knee) and then tell the rest of the country that the natives are very happy to be part of USA.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[gravesb]

Actually, studies comparing economics and freedom have shown a strong correlation between social freedom and economic growth and development. Although maybe not the level of proof, it does show that there are strong advantages for everyone in increasing personal freedom.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[kymarto]

In response to your first point: the assumption that democratic societies do better in the long run than totalitarian societies is now being directly challenged by China's ascension. Past totalitarian societies tended to be autarkic and limited market freedom, and as such were very inefficient economically. China has taken a different route and as Naomi Klein (The Shock Syndrome) says, China is now the world's most successful capitalistic society. I live in Beijing half of every year and travel throughout China. When you see 60 and 70 year-old ladies with pickaxes cheerfully working on building roads, you begin to understand the strength that China has at their command. If you can unite the people and motivate them towards fulfilling common goals you have a strong hand. There is a pioneer spirit in China that has long been lacking in most Western societies. But make no mistake, the Chinese are not docile: there were 78,000 protests in the country last year. The government is sitting on a societal nuclear reactor: they need to allow just enough freedom that people remain motivated, without allowing enough for people to feel emboldened to demand more than can be provided. There is a very conscientious direction using "carrot and stick" control rods to keep the reaction moderated without going critical... To compare China with the Middle East economically is way off base. IMO the ME produces nothing except oil because it can do so and remain viable, but China produces just about everything. According to Kevin Philips (in so many words), empires have historically tended to become fragile and crumble when the states controlling them turn from manufacturing and production of tangible goods to service and finance. By those lights, China is just in ascendancy. But wait: like Japan in the 80's I believe that the China's seeming strength masks critical structural problems. First, China is 100 years too late. Continued social stability in China is going to depend on people feeling that the government, for all its corruption and repression, is worth supporting because life is getting better for them. China's current growth is completely unsustainable in the long run with the current level of resource use. The Chinese leaders are between a rock and a hard place (aren't we all) choosing between quick gains using unsustainable means, and some sacrifice now and investment in R&D. So far they have pretty consistently chosen the former. Also, the demographics are not in their favor with the "success" of the one-child policy. Then there is the critical problem of corruption. Most people in the West see the CCP as a monolithic entity, without realizing that it maintains control through a complex tree of provincial governments and petty bureaucracies, many of which operate under the assumption that "the mountains are high and the emperor is far away", and are totally corrupt. The Party has stated that eliminating corruption is essential to its long-term survival. No easy task. Economically, too, there are storm clouds gathering. Already global capital is moving to Vietnam and other places where labor is even cheaper than in China; and the RMB is rising, making exports more expensive. Factories are closing everywhere and the government is talking about supporting the stock market. Make no mistake, China is presently strong and will remain strong for a long time to come, but the "good times" may well be coming to an end

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Derosian]

Actually there isn't but there is scientific evidence, i.e. repeated attempts at creating a communist government, which eventually led to dictatorship or a tyrannical rule as the government had too much power. Now I have to admit in comparison to other communist governments China seems to actually be trying to do what it considers right for the majority of its citizens, although obviously that is going to create conflict due to the very nature of what they have to control.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[hey!]

We have a right to call their form of government invalid.

As a matter of pragmatism, we live with it. That's what recognizing a government means. It purely pragmatic. You make agreements with a government because it's pragmatic. You keep them because you want your word to mean something.

But recognizing a government's "right" to oppress its citizens is not to recognize a moral right, or to disavow your own moral right to stand, and indeed act against it.

It just means we recognizing the futility of doing anything directly against it at this time.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[hey!]

Or look at the Arab dictatorships of the Middle East: sure, a lot of them are wealthy, but they're basically all failures.

should take a look at the Middle Eastern regimes, which are typically not regimes we would admire I agree. Thinking about them as the same is a lazy habit.

Oil is a curse to a country that doesn't have something bigger, economically. The regimes of the Middle East that are supported by oil wealth are not failures -- in their own terms.

Wealth you conjure out of otherwise worthless ground covers a lot of mediocrity and incompetence. It can buy a lot of favors from people who otherwise don't give a damn about your country; it nibble at he line between the honest and the corrupt, until the only honest people left are suckers.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Andrew-Unit]

The quote in italics above was taken from Wikipedia. I intended to cite it, but didn't catch it in the preview.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Eternauta3k]

Pathetic, as are all moral relativists.

Wait, so if he were saying that banning gun ownership is the only correct decision, you'd be OK with it (as he would be an absolutist)?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[BrokenHalo]

The rate of gun crime in England didn't exactly go down when the legal guns were taken away.

What are you talking about? Civilians never had the right to go around carrying guns (the police don't either, excep for select groups), so from which orifice are you pulling your statistics?

As for criminals, they will be criminals and the rest of society has no control over them. The whole point of being a criminal is to set yourself aside (outcast yourself, if you will) from the common aspirations of the community.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Eternauta3k]

He specifically said Arab dictatorships, those examples thousands of years old don't apply. Sure, they weren't democratic back then, but the term dictatorship doesn't apply either. Something changed between their golden age and their current crappy situation (amongst other things, crusades and European and North American actions)

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

Typical brainwashed kids. Sigh...

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[BrokenHalo]

Please no comparing Tibet to Iraq here.

No danger of that. There's no oil in Tibet.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[BrokenHalo]

Last I read, Israel has been on the defensive in every war

Either you have a very flexible definition of "war", or your reading is very selective. Israel has conducted countless offensive attacks, killing off women and children with abandon. In fact, Israel has increasingly become the agressor in more recent conflicts.

And, for the record, I am not a partisan of either side, simply stating things as they are.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[bbhack]

There is so much sense in this thread, I worry that I have awakened in a parallel opposite universe. Scary, I say.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[BrokenHalo]

Well done. I'm glad somebody brought this up. I guess it's just so easy for some of us to forget that these ancient cities and cultures are at the wellspring of the sciences, as well as the bible.

Islam came a lot later, but from any number of things I've read, it has become increasingly difficult for the layman to establish the differences between what the prophet said and modern usage of the resulting customs.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[ozphx]

We (Australia) had a guy who was already in prison charged for making hand-written "erotic" stories about 10 year old boys. "Lolita" it probably wasn't, but hey, sometimes you write a masterpiece and get awards, sometimes its a 5 year jail term. Who am I to judge? :P

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[ozphx]

There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!

You want scientific proof? How about we come over there and forcibly liberate your ass? We'll bring democracy over there and shove it down your throat until you are shitting freedom.

If anyone here is from the US, please realise that I'm being sarcastic.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Antique Geekmeister]

And social darwinism rears its ugly head. Given that China is now roaring into a massive economic powerhouse, does that make their politics wise or helpful to its citizens or others? Given that the USA is the richest country in the world, does that make Guantanamo Bay wise or even constitutional? If you want to see an effective Muslim culture, take a look at Kuwait. Taking on Israel means taking on the USA. But Afghanistan has, successfully and bloodily, taken on the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and is now working hard at kicking out their former allies, the USA. So let's leave aside the military comparisons without more thought spent on them, shall we?

Look again at that '99% of your population aren't worth listening to'. It's easy to 'listen to them', and get your own policies back, when you control information to the populace. Every totalitarion regime has shown this, and so have many theocracies and monarchies. Stupid or not, it's a popular approach. So it must be doing something right to be so historically common, even if it breaks down under outside competitive pressture.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[ColdWetDog]

He specifically said Arab dictatorships, those examples thousands of years old don't apply. Sure, they weren't democratic back then, but the term dictatorship doesn't apply

That's right 'dictatorship' would be much too "nice" a term to apply to the various forms of brutal repression, murder, rape, graft and general weirdness that some of those ancient civilizations were known for. Read some of the history of the time. [citation needed, it's early and I'm lazy]

The longstanding effects of a given culture often outlast and are usually irrespective of then-contemporary "human rights". Humans by and large aren't a very nice group of people. Get used to it.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

Number two, the ban on child pornography is not because the porn itself is obscene, it is because its production is harmful. See this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition#Majority_opinion

Laws prohibiting the distribution and possession of child pornography ban speech because of the manner in which it is produced, regardless of its serious literary or artistic value.

If you don't understand how this is different from China blocking all of iTMS because a handful of songs protested their takeover and violent suppression of a sovereign nation, by all means emigrate to China.

I fail to see how blocking all of iTMS to prevent handful of songs is any different than blocking all of the alt.* newsgroups (or alt.bin* in AT&T's case) to block a handful of newsgroups that contain child pornography.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Antique Geekmeister]

And the United States has had slavery, the Japanese/American imprisonment of WWII, Guantanamo Bay right now, the repressions of the War on Some Drugs. We do need to keep a sense that if we're 'better', it's as a matter of scale.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I mean, it's not like criminals will break the law to get their hands on guns now that they know that the general populace probably doesn't have a gun.

Oh wait...

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[bds1986]

Uh, maybe because one is imposed by a government, who can enact criminal penalties for attempts to circumvent the block, and the other is imposed by a commercial corporation who you can choose not to do business with? Last time I checked AT&T isn't going to send you to a labour camp if you view alt.*.

And don't even get me started on the whole "child porn vs some song with lyrics you disagree with" argument.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sycodon]

Every action Israel has taken has been in response to violence perpetrated upon them.

Whether it is suicide bombers coming from the West Bank, or the entire freakn Syrian army and air force coming across the border.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[zz_fish]

So how powerful is the public opinion in the west? Are there more people supporting Iraqi war than against? even within the US? Apparently while China is governed by elite families and friends, the US is governed by elite corporations. I do think that citizens of some smaller European countries have real saying about their government, but that hasn't been proven to work in larger countries.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[zz_fish]

I agree, comparing Tibet and Iraq is like comparing Latin city states conquered by the Romans and cities burned by the Goths in medieval times. In a serious note, in totalitarian China, more people wanted to keep Tibet as part of it; in liberty US, were there more people wanted to burn Iraq?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[zz_fish]

And if you read a little history, by destroying the governing body of another country, and establish a new one with weaker support, the new government will become dependent on you, because by itself it cannot survive its opposition force. The trick is to support the new government while keeping its opposition strong, in order to maintain this relationship.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[FishWithAHammer]

Civilians never had the right to go around carrying guns (the police don't either, excep for select groups), so from which orifice are you pulling your statistics?

The rise in UK gun crime is a long term trend that is apparently unaffected by the state of UK firearms legislation. [27] Before the 1997 ban, handguns were only held by 0.1% of the population,[28] and while the number of crimes involving firearms in England and Wales increased from 13,874 in 1998/99 to 24,070 in 2002/03, they remained relatively static at 24,094 in 2003/04, and have since fallen to 21,521 in 2005/06.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom#Homicide_and_firearms_crime

Sources are cited in the article. I've heard nothing but horror stories from friends in the UK who've had their homes broken into and had the police recommend only "hide." Me? Well, I don't live in a high-crime area, but a firearm is in my bedroom (in a thumbprint-locked safe) and I am quite qualified in its use; any who broke into my home would regret the act. :)

As for criminals, they will be criminals and the rest of society has no control over them. The whole point of being a criminal is to set yourself aside (outcast yourself, if you will) from the common aspirations of the community.

Correct--but that the populace in the UK still voted themselves into defenselessness. Laughable and sad, really.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[shutdown -p now]

Can you name a single liberal capitalist democracy circa 5000BC, or in the 8th century?

The point of GPs post was that, in today's world, the democratic Free World is more progressive on all accounts than legacy autocratic regimes. And during the Islamic Golden Age, Arab Islamic society was more progressive than medieval feudal Europe. There's no contradiction here.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sydneyfong]

Apparently while China is governed by elite families and friends, the US is governed by elite corporations

How is the US not governed by elite families and friends? Are you really sure the current US president got this position due to merits of his own?
And vice versa, how is China not governed by elite corporations? (well until recently China had no corporations... so it didn't apply, but this will change soon)

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sydneyfong]

Legitimacy of the CCP is always an interesting topic. But no, your analysis is simply too naive.

Their legitimacy in the 1950s was basically based on might, since they won the civil war against the KMT. Their "legitimacy" during 1960-1970s was basically based on Mao's cult-like following. Legitimacy since 1980s have been based on the government's success on economic growth... and recently on making China a potential world superpower.

But the fundamental legitimacy of the CCP is the fact that there has been no major uprisings against them. After all, if a billion people are upset by your rule, no amount of oppression would be sufficient to contain the outrage. The people ultimately hold the veto power. And one thing you may not know about the Chinese is that they are experts in uprisings when it is deemed that the Emperor no longer has the "heavens mandate"...

Of course, what I didn't mention is how they are going to maintain that legitimacy, i.e. how long will they be able to keep the people happy with economic growth etc., without giving them any substantial political rights. They probably can't, and this problem is going to fuel a major change in China within the next few decades...

Legitimacy is not necessarily static.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sydneyfong]

Perhaps it's because I'm living in a place with a really low crime rate (eg. I walk the streets way past midnight and there had never been any problem)... but I've always thought that feeling the need to use a gun in a civilized society is simply so crude. Or more precisely... barbaric.

I hope you don't mind the analogy, but it's like if you take a tribesman from the amazon for a tour in your city and he insists on taking his trusty spear with him, just in case he's attacked....

And isn't the purpose of the right to bear arms is when the government gets corrupted beyond repair, it gives the people the devices to stage a revolution? It definitely wasn't written into the US constitution so that you guys could shoot that burglar...

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[darien]

Laughable and sad, really.

Annual firearm homicides per 100,000 population:

England and Wales: 0.12
United States: 2.97

I know where I feel safer.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[FishWithAHammer]

Those numbers mean absolutely nothing, if only because the size of the area being reduced to those numbers is huge. There hasn't been a homicide in my area in ten, maybe twelve years. There are homicides regularly in some districts of London.

Besides, what's laughable and sad is reducing their rights to offer an illusion of security. But I imagine you knew this, and are trolling.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[FishWithAHammer]

I believe you misunderstand. I would rather never need to use a gun. But the ability to do so should not be denied to me in defense of my person and those of others.

As for the purpose of the right to bear arms--that theory you put forth was essentially demolished by Heller v. D.C., as Heller reduced the importance of the militia as opposed to citizens' defense.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Gerhardius]

South Africa could be largely ignored and chided into changing their ways, but China is big enough to pretty much do as they like. Somebody will always deal with you when you have over 1 billion people, and hold the US economy by the short hairs.

Downloading songs for Tibet is pretty weak if it is meant to be some form of protest. The funny thing is that few people seem to know the key role played by the CIA in the securing the modern mythology of Tibet.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

"For instance, if a family protests the fact that a school collapsed in an earthquake and killed their daughter, and you arrest the family (which is the kind of shit the Chinese government is currently doing)"
do you have a source for this bs?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sydneyfong]

I don't imply you would want to use a gun. But even the thought of having the possibility to resort to deadly violence is still rather unsettling.

I mean, even if somebody breaks into my house and tries to steal things away I wouldn't want to shoot a bullet at him...

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[HappySmileMan]

How is the US not governed by elite families and friends? Are you really sure the current US president got this position due to merits of his own?

Well the corporations are generally run by, or controlled by, or controlling, those families and friends you speak of.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Brett Buck]

>We ban child porn and bomb making instructions,
>they ban bad music that criticizes the
>government. If anything they should be consistent
>and just ban bad music. How is it our place to
>criticize them? A country should be able to make
>decisions about what ideas it tolerates within
>its borders. Not all countries will make the same
>decision. Not everyone agrees with us
>enlightened, progressive, "free" Westerners. Get
>over it and get over yourselves.

      This is the sort of idiotic "moral relativism" argument that allows murdering thugs to continue with their actions. The "all opinions are equally valid" crapola that is destroying western society. There are such things as "right" and "wrong". Adults having sex with children (and adults taking pictures of it) is *wrong* by ANY civilized standards. Murdering monks in the streets or shipping people off to "re-education camps" for protesting is *wrong*. Why should we be afraid of confronting it or speaking out about it?

          Brett

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[FishWithAHammer]

I mean, even if somebody breaks into my house and tries to steal things away I wouldn't want to shoot a bullet at him...

Someone's invading your home. He might be there to steal your things. He might be there to steal your things and kill you to prevent later identification (that's not unheard-of). Do you cower in the corner and hope that maybe the police come in time to save your bacon, or do you defend yourself and your home? Remember: the police are there to track down the perpetrators of a crime, not prevent it from happening in the first place.

I am well-trained in the use of my personal defense firearm and I have a concealed weapons permit (though I do not use it); the others in my home know what to do if somebody attempts to break in (call 911 and hide under the bed, because they are not trained with a firearm--that's why it's locked in a safe when not in use). I am certain that the residents of my home are more likely to survive a home invasion than in a home without such protection.

You might choose not to do so; that's fine. The idea that others should be stripped of their right to defend themselves because you choose not to do so, however, is preposterous.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[sydneyfong]

The flip side is that if I happen to be mistaken as a burglar I might get killed.
There are legitimate reasons to knock on somebody's door at midnight, and I don't want to be greeted with a gun.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Anonymous Coward]

The West kicked the ass of the totalitarian regimes of Nazi Germany and Italy in WWII

Yes, if you include Russia as part of the west....

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Weedlekin]

"the apartheid regime owes it's downfall partly due to economic sanctions by the western world."

That's because apartheid South Africa had a population of less than 30 million people and an economy that was almost totally dependant on commerce with other Western countries. Both factors made them extremely easy to bully.

"the western world is powerful, and public opinion is a powerful factor in the western world"

The Western world is powerful on paper, but gutless in practice when it's dealing with anyone big enough to call its bluff:

- North Korea got nuclear weapons despite what the West wanted because we were too shit scared of their big Chinese neighbour to do anything beyond attempting to bribe them.

- India got nuclear weapons despite the West not wanting it because it's big enough to take care of itself.

- Ditto for Pakistan, which is probably where Osama is hiding because we're too shit scared to go in and get him.

- Iran will end up with nuclear weapons unless Israel decides to do something to stop them. Meanwhile, the "powerful West" tries the same tactics that failed with North Korea because we're far too scared of their military muscle to do anything else.

- Russia waltzed into Georgia despite it being allied with the "powerful West" because Putin knows we're far too shit scared to risk fighting anything with more military might than Serbia in that region.

There have been plenty of other examples since WWII that show the "powerful West" as being just like the Soviet Union was during the same period, i.e. a bully that only picks on little countries, while posturing and dancing endlessly to avoid having to actually walk the walk with anyone big enough to potentially give it a bloody nose.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[burnitdown]

This is the sort of idiotic "moral relativism" argument that allows murdering thugs to continue with their actions. The "all opinions are equally valid" crapola that is destroying western society. There are such things as "right" and "wrong". Adults having sex with children (and adults taking pictures of it) is *wrong* by ANY civilized standards. Murdering monks in the streets or shipping people off to "re-education camps" for protesting is *wrong*. Why should we be afraid of confronting it or speaking out about it?

I am a scientist; I see no evidence for absolute "wrong" or "right" in the universe. I do not see that as moral relativism, which appears to me to be making excuses from an absolute standard for favored groups.

What I am arguing here, in fact, has nothing to do with morality. It has to do with isolationism. They can run their country as they see fit, because this is the best way for all humans to get along. If horrors occur there, well, c'est la vie -- we have more than enough problems here we should be fixing.

I find it ironic that on a message board where most people will argue for individual independence that it is considered OK to violate another nation's independence. It seems to a mentality of trying to make the whole world safe by conquering anything that personally frightens us.

My advice for the West is simple:

(A) You are decaying from within. Fix yourselves.
(B) If what China does annoys you, stop buying cheap goods from China and let them wither on the vine.
(C) Recognize that life is, always has been, and always will be a struggle, presumably to eliminate the delusional and promote the realistic.

I am a scientist. I am a realist. This is the best theory I can give you.

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Eternauta3k]

Sure they were brutal and did horrible stuff, but dictatorship is a modern term for a time when democracy is widespread. Analyzing medieval governments like they were in the 20th century isn't the way to go. All scientific and cultural advancement before democracy happened in shitty governments (dictatorships if you will)

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[Jewbird]

I see no evidence for absolute "wrong" or "right" in the universe.

Is that due to the absence of right and wrong in the universe, or the limitations of your understanding?

Re:Every country has a different threshold

[FishWithAHammer]

There are legitimate reasons to knock on somebody's door at midnight, and I don't want to be greeted with a gun.

Right, but the thing is--somebody competent and trained in the proper use of a firearm for self-defense won't do that. Mine's within easy reach, but I am trained to determine whether a threat exists. Only in obvious cases--a shattering window, for example--would I draw a weapon before investigating.

Yes, there are stupid people (hi, Texans!) who won't do this, but I find it silly to restrict everyone because of stupid people. (We let stupid people drive...)

If...

[denzacar]

If you like iTunes and you are one of the billion people residing in China...

This is kinda hypothetical, right?
Cause... while I can't disregard the possibility of being a resident of China some day, my imagination falters at the idea of liking iTunes.

Sorta like "...if I were an Oscar Mayer wiener...".
While I can imagine changing my name to Oscar Mayer, I can't really see myself as a wiener.
Well... the whole me, not just a part.

Slashdot in China

[MrKaos]

Can you even access slashdot from within China? Seems to me if you are in China you have 'No Rights On-line', come to think of it, if you are in China you have 'No Rights At-All'.

Now we know what it is like to live under a government that the people fear. A government so concerned about loosing face in the Olympics that they did everything they could do to embarrass themselves and prove what everyone has been saying about them all along. That they are a group of thugs prepared to subdue anyone that gets in their way. I'm sure you'll censor that Mr Hu Jintao. president of a Totalitarian State.

So now English citizens can look forward to having their freedoms raped in the name of 'Protecting the Olympics from Terrorism legislations' and the television stations can conclude their coverage with 'We will now return you to your regularly scheduled apathy'.

Re:Slashdot in China

[aeroswift]

Yes, you can access slashdot from China. In fact, I'm sitting at a computer in one of Shanghai's suburban neighborhoods. You're jumping to some pretty big conclusions there. A lot of the Western media covering Chinese affairs do nothing but criticize. I'm not saying they shouldn't criticize, but it really leaves Westerners with the impression that the Chinese government is so cruel and harsh that all the citizens are living in fear. Um, no. We really aren't that affected at all, and I can say (because yes, I have lived in the US and Australia) that life here is no different, except for the annoying fact that I can't access Freewebs.

Re:Slashdot in China

[MichaelSmith]

Can you even access slashdot from within China?

I am not sure but a chinese guy in my team (I live in Australia) was browsing something which was obviously slashdot: same colors, layout, software etc but in chinese. I said to him hey thats slashdot and he said whats slashdot?.

Re:Slashdot in China

[onion2k]

Slash, the code that runs Slashdot, is open source and freely available - http://www.slashcode.com/ - there are lots of sites that bear more than a passing resemblance to Slashdot simply because the codebase is the same.

Re:Slashdot in China

[MichaelSmith]

Slash, the code that runs Slashdot, is open source and freely available - http://www.slashcode.com/ - there are lots of sites that bear more than a passing resemblance to Slashdot simply because the codebase is the same.

Yeah but I think sourceforge own the look and feel. I believe there was once a slashdot in spain but I can't find it now. The slashdot page on wikipedia has a link to a japanese slashdot.

I think somebody has ripped off the L&F for their own site in China. Wouldn't be the first time.

Re:Slashdot in China

[threephaseboy]

slashdot in spain

http://barrapunto.com/ I believe the title literally translates to "Slashdot"

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

I think somebody has ripped off the L&F for their own site in China. Wouldn't be the first time.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. The Chinese people are just trying to flatter us when they copy our products!

It's a cultural thing, I suppose.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

I am also reading /. and I am in Beijing, there is now way they would ever block access to sl

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol, it's like a mexican slashdot

Re:Slashdot in China

[vic-traill]

http://barrapunto.com/ I believe the title literally translates to "Slashdot"

And hey, if you Google translate barrapunto.com from Spanish to English, it's more better grammar, too!

http://translate.google.ca/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fbarrapunto.com%2F&sl=es&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Re:Slashdot in China

[MrKaos]

Yes, you can access slashdot from China. In fact, I'm sitting at a computer in one of Shanghai's suburban neighborhoods.

Ok, that answers the question - thanks.

You're jumping to some pretty big conclusions there.

Maybe, but China's history of human rights abuses speaks for itself. I guess for pointing that out I deserve to be modded a troll, thanks for that moderators. Frankly, it makes me angry, because oppression of any people in any country provides lessons to oppress people anywhere.

the Chinese government is so cruel and harsh that all the citizens are living in fear. Um, no.

Hmmm, I remember videos and reports of the Chinese government running over one of their own citizens with a tank. And more recently allegations of organ harvesting from Falon Gong members. So perhaps it's not fear more an imposed state of apathy, where it's extremely uncomfortable to talk about things the government doesn't want people to talk about. Tibet, Taiwan. Threatening two old ladies to 'hard labour re-education' because they *wanted* to protest reinforces the perceptions that the Chinese government is actually all that it's critics say it is. The emperor has no clothes.

We really aren't that affected at all, and I can say (because yes, I have lived in the US and Australia) that life here is no different, except for the annoying fact that I can't access Freewebs.

Great. Does that mean you a Chinese citizen? I'm free to say what I want and, yes, I'll defend your right to disagree with me, but I doubt that the same attitude is even vaguely present in China. I'm not having a go at you personally but I stand by my original "troll".

Because if it wasn't true then why would the Chinese government even need a 'Great Firewall of China'.

Re:Slashdot in China

[thermian]

Maybe, but China's history of human rights abuses speaks for itself.

If its history we're talking about, then what about America's history of human rights abuse (slave trade anyone?), or the UK (slaves again, plus that whole empire thing, and navvies).

In fact almost all western countries have just as bad a record as China, only for us a lot of it is in the past. for the US that past isn't too far back, we are in fact talking just decades since the 'not slaves any more honest' were fully accorded the rights they were promised by Lincoln.

Not that I don't like America, I do, its just that I don't hide from the truth of things.

So, check your history before declaring China to be the fount of all that is wrong in the world.

Re:Slashdot in China

[seibed]

"I remember videos and reports of the Chinese government running over one of their own citizens with a tank" - Apparently you don't remember it very well, as no one got run over in that particular infamous incident.

Re:Slashdot in China

[cortana]

If China is taking moral cues from how Imperial powers acted in the 19th century and before then yes, we have a problem.

Interestingly, no one seems to know much about how the slave trade was ended, in large part due to the efforts of Britain after we decided to abolish it.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod aeroswift down. He has obviously been "re-educated".

Re:Slashdot in China

[Vectronic]

2008 is shaping up as the year's coldest twenty-first century

Slashdot commented upon in the year 2008 will be the coldest this century, according to data supplied by the British Meteorological Office, due to the climatic phenomenon of "girls" that cools the waters of the Pacific Ocean.

Kickass, so according to the Google translation of Spanish... all we need are more girls, and the planet wont get hotter?...huh... it would be a climactic phenomenon though...

Re:Slashdot in China

[flyingsquid]

If its history we're talking about, then what about America's history of human rights abuse (slave trade anyone?), or the UK (slaves again, plus that whole empire thing, and navvies). In fact almost all western countries have just as bad a record as China, only for us a lot of it is in the past. for the US that past isn't too far back, we are in fact talking just decades since the 'not slaves any more honest' were fully accorded the rights they were promised by Lincoln.

The difference is not that the United States has made no mistakes- it's made some pretty awful ones. The difference is that when society feels that these mistakes need to be corrected, the government sooner or later has to respond, because citizens are free to voice their opinions and influence the debate. That happened with the abolition of slavery, and that happened again with the civil rights movement. Elements of the government did try to fight the civil rights movement, but ultimately Martin Luther King was not sent off to a labor camp for re-education. That meant he was able to keep speaking out to persuade our society and our government to try to do the right thing.

Re:Slashdot in China

[MightyYar]

If its history we're talking about, then what about America's history of human rights abuse (slave trade anyone?), or the UK (slaves again, plus that whole empire thing, and navvies).

That America and that UK no longer exist. All of the people that comprised them are dead. Most modern citizens and government representatives strongly condemn these past actions.

Compare that to modern day China, where the people responsible for Tienanmen are still in power.

for the US that past isn't too far back, we are in fact talking just decades since the 'not slaves any more honest' were fully accorded the rights they were promised by Lincoln.

But no matter the behavior of the US, it doesn't excuse China's behavior. The US continues to have major racial problems, but that doesn't mean that China shouldn't be held accountable for THEIR human rights abuses. We should be working for human rights in BOTH places, not giving up on China because the US isn't perfect yet.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure I understand. The fact that decades and decades ago the American people did bad things somehow means that today China driving over dissidents is an ok thing and says nothing about the quality of life there?

Re:Slashdot in China

[MrKaos]

If its history we're talking about, then what about America's history of human rights abuse (slave trade anyone?), or the UK (slaves again, plus that whole empire thing, and navvies).

I object to ALL human rights abuses. As it stands the subject of *this* conversation and *this* Olympics is China's human right's abuses.

So, check your history before declaring China to be the fount of all that is wrong in the world.

I'm well versed in the human rights abuses of Western countries, thank you very much. I did have an open mind on China during the lead up to the Olympics, but as I learned more it's evident that China has a record of human rights abuses at least as bad as western countries.

Oppression is a trans-national phenomenon that must be challenged wherever it occurs.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Only difference is here in the US we've now moved onto the rights of animals and fags so yeah we have a jaded past but we're WAY much further along.

We don't eat cute animals and gay people are starting to get married!!!

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Congratulations,

you've found the only website on the web that's slower with the news than slashdot, and it's... slashdot!

Re:Slashdot in China

[TheRaven64]

I believe the grandparent was referring to how the human rights abuses are reported. For example, in the UK there was the 2005 incident where Jean Charles de Menezes was shot by police for running while looking a bit foreign. In the local press, this was covered as a serious abuse of police power by a small number of individuals and a total failure of the system. It could easily have been covered as a government-sponsored assassination of someone rumoured to have been criticising official policy. If you read the former, you might be concerned about the British police. If you read the latter, you would gain the impression that the UK is a totalitarian regime where the people live in fear of death squads (it isn't yet, but Tony did his best). Coverage of events in China by the western media tends to favour the second interpretation. Unfortunately, there isn't an unbiased source available, so it's very hard to find the truth. Talking to people who live in China you get a very different picture (although I know one Chinese girl whose father isn't allowed to visit her because the government won't allow him to leave the country with his brain full of military secrets).

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Falon Gong is a Chinese cult that bankrolled by the US to launch smearing campaign against Chinese government. The leader of the group claim that he is God, mullah and Buddha morph into one. How legit can this group be? They were out lawed but picked up by US for the sole purpose of propaganda tool against China. Members are all Chinese. I think US would shut it down if more westerners starting to join.

Re:Slashdot in China

[jrumney]

They certainly did get run over at Tienanmen Square. An ex-flatmate's brother lost his leg there. You're talking about the famous photo of the guy stopping the tank by standing in front of it, but that wasn't the only tank, and they didn't always stop.

Re:Slashdot in China

[makomk]

To be honest, I think you're missing the point totally. Not only is there absolutely no evidence that Jean Charles de Menezes was shot for criticising official policy, I'm not aware of any evidence of him criticising policy.

On the other hand, there is plenty of fairly solid evidence of bad things happening to people who criticise the Chinese government or its policies, and of deliberate attempts by the police to shut them up (usually, but not always, in the non-fatal sense). While it's unclear if these activities have official central government approval or are official policy, since they don't do anything to stop them they are complicit in said activities.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Suburban Shanghai? Man life must suck. I couldn't even get stuff to eat DOWNTOWN after about 10pm.

Re:Slashdot in China

[clragon]

I was in China a couple of weeks ago to visit family and friends. I was in Nanjing and I used the internet to check on the availability of some site that I frequently use.

There are 3 kinds of sites in China in terms of availability. The first is the site with its server in China, these sites are usually fast and reliable. But sometimes you can find a foreign site that responds really fast, like slashdot did for me.

The second are the sites that are totally blocked. Apart from the obvious ones like FalunGong.com I only found sites with satellite images blocked 24/7, such as wikimapia. Google map's Chinese version doesn't have satellite images.

The last group of sites are somewhat in between the first and second. They are not available or unavailable 24/7 but you will loose connection to them at random or their connection will be very slow at times. Sites that go in this category are facebook, sourceforge, youtube, and many of the foreign sites.

Now, it's hard to tell if the government blocked sites in the last group because they work fine most of them time, but all of the sudden the site will slow to a crawl or not show up at all.

Now I know the ISP blocks sites that contain anti-government messages while you are browsing it, but when I looked at my last page before the connection slowed, there weren't any. So as a result most Chinese stick to Chinese forums to vent their frustration about the government or to get news on the newest embarrassing thing they did, because the sites are much faster for them.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Thinking about US remember:
* japanese interment
* Abu ghraib
* secret CIA prisons in Europe
* Guantanamo Bay detention camp
* 1999 WTO convention in Seattle
* 1968 Democratic Party convention

The video you talk about was of a citizen stoping the tank not being run over it.

In China the "army" atacks its own people.
In US the "National guard" was at the 68 convention.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

That's nothing, I heard GoogleLabs are working on an app that will not only translate /. but it'll also remove dupes and change article headers to the truth.
  Why else do you think they have all those big data centers?

Re:Slashdot in China

[sam0737]

A government so concerned about loosing face in the Olympics...

Precisely, it's not the government, but the officials are so concerned about that. Mao taught the people a lesson that they have to be "political correct" otherwise you will lose your head (most likely not only you but your family), that's 70's and has since become a culture. Today, you won't lose your head that easily (there's a lot of voices against the government in local blog and forum) but for the officials, there is nothing "wrong" to be "political correct", why risking my job in doing the otherwise?

If you think we live under a government that the people fear, that's probably how an extreme Chinese might think about the American too (under the fear of terrorism and the watch of the Big Brother). The fact is, no we are not, and we are probably the same. Both China and US, the general public are not affected, we still work, play, shop and watching porn unaffected. We both think the government is stupid. There might be a little difference how we voice out about our hate to the government, but other than that, I think there are no difference. (Ok, I'm a Hong Kong citizen currently living and working in Shanghai, closely interactive with my colleagues who are Chinese. I also regularly travel to US for working purpose and has been an Exchange student there.)

And, as always, the Chinese already figured out how to circumvent the particular iTunes problem, if you know how to read Chinese: http://www.macx.cn/a/a.mac?B=4000&ID=656667&Ar=656867&AUpflag=1&Ap=1&Aq=1

Re:Slashdot in China

[zmooc]

We really aren't that affected at all

Did you know there's a word for that? It's called apathy.

Re:Slashdot in China

[microbox]

A lot of the Western media covering Chinese affairs do nothing but criticize.

The right to disbelieve is about as sacred as you get in the West. The chinese seem to believe they have the right to control other peoples thinking - including in the west. Obviously we're not going to get along very well.

We really aren't that affected at all, and I can say (because yes, I have lived in the US and Australia) that life here is no different, except for the annoying fact that I can't access Freewebs.

Not affected until something shitty happens, and then you find out that you've got no way to even tell someone what happened. I guess it's okay, simply because the odds of that are really small right? right??

Re:Slashdot in China

[rufus t firefly]

That happened with the abolition of slavery, and that happened again with the civil rights movement. Elements of the government did try to fight the civil rights movement, but ultimately Martin Luther King was not sent off to a labor camp for re-education. That meant he was able to keep speaking out to persuade our society and our government to try to do the right thing.

I'm not sure if that exactly supports your point. Many people were beaten or hanged during slavery for resisting, and it took a "war between the states" to eventually force the lower half of the country to give up their practice of slavery.

Same thing with the civil rights movement -- many people were beaten or jailed for demanding that (gasp!) people were equal despite skin color, which most civilized people have come to accept.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see that.

Shut them down, cut them open and sell their organs on the open market.

Re:Slashdot in China

[nomadic]

So, check your history before declaring China to be the fount of all that is wrong in the world.

Complete strawman. The people who criticize China tend to be people who also criticize the US. They're not hypocrites for including China as a target.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

The "he without sin" argument is a standard on made in debates about china, and it is flawed. I am an american. I criticize human right abuses by anyone. Just because my country has an atrocious human rights record doesn't mean I cannot shed light on the China's.

Re:Slashdot in China

[EllisDees]

It's no different except for the constant hovering police escort, or the random interrogations.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm also reading slashdot from mars (nasa uses midgets to move the rovers as electric motors are too expensive). The neat thing is the latency is so bad here I always get first post on the dupes.

Re:Slashdot in China

[KermodeBear]

Maybe, but China's history of human rights abuses speaks for itself.

If its history we're talking about, then what about America's history of human rights abuse (slave trade anyone?), or the UK (slaves again, plus that whole empire thing, and navvies).

Yeah. But that's the thing. It is history. We stopped what we were doing, because we realized that it was wrong. In America, we spilled a lot of blood over the issue. China continues to do some pretty nasty things.

And you're right - China isn't the only place where a lot of bad things happen. That doesn't mean we shouldn't point it out, though.

"I'm not the only one, so it is okay!" isn't a good excuse.

Re:Slashdot in China

[nitehawk214]

In fact almost all western countries have just as bad a record as China, only for us a lot of it is in the past.

Nice strawman attack there, how about we compare human rights in at least the current century, if not the current decade.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

King was murdered.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of the Western media covering Chinese affairs do nothing but criticize. I'm not saying they shouldn't criticize, but it really leaves Westerners with the impression that the Chinese government is so cruel and harsh that all the citizens are living in fear.

Congratulations to China ...

It means they have joined the Arab and Muslim countries in that honor ...

We have been "enjoying" that for decades ...

Re:Slashdot in China

[DeadDecoy]

You should also add that the war between the states was not about the morality of slavery but rather which was more economically feasible to each side. The North's economy was based around paying low wages and letting people fend for themselves. The South was based on free labor that was provided food and shelter (e.g. NSTAAFL). The argument over slavery and economy was pretty tightly intertwined and hotly contested, as wealthy peoples' way of life hinged on it. Even after the North won, I'm pretty sure Black people were not suddenly treated as equals by those in 'free' states.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

If China is taking moral cues from how Imperial powers acted in the 19th century and before then yes, we have a problem.

Interestingly, no one seems to know much about how the slave trade was ended, in large part due to the efforts of Britain after we decided to abolish it.

Exactly..so you think the Chinese can't solve the problem without being pushed.

Re:Slashdot in China

[bogjobber]

Sorry, even in a roundabout way the British can't take credit for ending the slave trade without looking like huge assholes (that'd be you). The slave trade was ended after all of the profits had already been made. All of the slave economies had large, stable populations of slaves by the time Britain banned slave trading in their territories. There was little money left to be made.

Ending slavery came later, and is substantially easier when you don't have any slaves in your country, and thus have little economic incentive to keep people enslaved. There were only slaves in a few British colonies in the 19th century (Jamaica et al), and their economic importance had dropped significantly since the height of the slave trade.

If you all had ended it in the 17th century when there were still unbelievable amounts of money to be made, you could puff your chest out about being morally superior. But you only ended slavery when it stopped affecting the bottom line. Understandable, but hardly any different than any other imperial power.

Re:Slashdot in China

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he was shot. Your point?

Re:Slashdot in China

[sydneyfong]

I think you're missing the point totally.

The point isn't whether Jean Charles de Menezes criticized the government. It's the attitude of the reporting, the bias, the implicit messages (sometimes grounded and sometimes not) that the Chinese government is unequivocally evil, bad, and oppressive.

If the GP's example isn't accurate enough, I'll give you an example I recall during the Olympic torch relay. If I remember correctly, BBC ran a story about protests during the torch relay, and then the reporter commented that there was no coverage of the protests in Chinese media -- implying that they had "filtered" away the news. But it turns out that the reason for the lack of coverage was due to some timezone and logistic difficulties, and the Chinese media ran the story about the protests (of course with much less emphasis on the negative side) a short while later.

Re:Slashdot in China

[sydneyfong]

Frankly, it makes me angry, because oppression of any people in any country provides lessons to oppress people anywhere.

Hmm, interesting. Where'd you get this myth from?
Come to think of it, China is actually really bad at oppressing people... Every time they jail somebody, the whole world points their fingers at them. Heck, even Yahoo is getting a lot of flame for assisting the Chinese government.

I mean, the USA is much more successful with Guantanamo... As for censorship, China has much to learn from the USA on how to censor things without people noticing, how to control the media yet making it seem "free".

If anything, I really hope China doesn't learn how to really oppress people from the USA....

Re:Slashdot in China

[sydneyfong]

Might be strawman, but since you're talking about a whole group of people...

How come on slashdot, besides the USA, the main subject of criticism is against China?

Being a US-centric site, large amounts of criticisms against the USA is expected since that's where most(?) slashdotters live and that's the country most slashdotters are familiar with. Yet why does China get more flames than any other place? Sure, China might be a larger country with a larger population, but I'm pretty sure if you add up the stories and comments criticizing any country in Europe, the number would still be lower than those criticizing China.

Simple analogy: I say to you "why are you always complaining about me?", and you reply "No I don't. I also complain about my wife. I'm not singling you out."

Re:Slashdot in China

[sydneyfong]

Mao taught the people a lesson that they have to be "political correct" otherwise you will lose your head (most likely not only you but your family), that's 70's and has since become a culture

This has been so for thousands of years in China. In fact, in the past, it wouldn't suffice to be "politically correct". Encountering a mistake in your political career (possibly not your fault) and you might be executed. In particular, you stand a high chance of being executed if you lose a battle (even if you're outnumbered and did your best). I don't recall Mao being that extreme...

(Hi there from Hong Kong, it's really hot this summer)

Re:Slashdot in China

[nomadic]

Yet why does China get more flames than any other place?

It has the largest population on earth and it is making an effort to be a world power. People are very wary of China, and the level of oppression there is, on a purely logistical scale, overwhelming. And honestly, I think a lot of people sense that China will soon push its problems on the rest of us. Chinese nationalism is at a disturbing level, and the sense I personally get from their relentless drive towards modernization is they want everyone to be intimidated. This is a country where they're still enraged about the opium wars.

Of course, they conveniently forget about past history where they were the aggressors, but that's a different conversation.

The obsession with this idea of projecting Chinese strength abroad is the direct cause of their cheating in the Olympics.

And on slashdot many other countries come under intense criticism. The UK is a very frequent target, especially due to their paranoia over surveillance.

Re:Slashdot in China

[MrKaos]

Hmm, interesting. Where'd you get this myth from?

Ever since WW2 governments have been have been using Hitler's techniques for controlling population.

Come to think of it, China is actually really bad at oppressing people... Every time they jail somebody, the whole world points their fingers at them. Heck, even Yahoo is getting a lot of flame for assisting the Chinese government.

Good, there should be more of it.

I mean, the USA is much more successful with Guantanamo... As for censorship, China has much to learn from the USA on how to censor things without people noticing, how to control the media yet making it seem "free".

So you actually don't disagree with me then and it's not a myth. Do you think that just because America does something bad it's right for China to do something 'not quite as bad'.

If anything, I really hope China doesn't learn how to really oppress people from the USA....

Well, I hope so too. You seem to be proving my point nicely.

Re:Slashdot in China

[MrKaos]

Simple analogy: I say to you "why are you always complaining about me?", and you reply "No I don't. I also complain about my wife. I'm not singling you out."

Sydney it's not about the Chinese or American's as a people it's about the governments. People around the world including myself marvel at the grace and beauty of Chinese culture, even I love "journey to the west".

But it doesn't mean I'm going to behave meekly when confronted with the oppression of the Chinese government, because challenging oppression everywhere is the way to freedom everywhere.

The last protest I saw in China turned bloody, and it was a telling message of what the Chinese government is prepared to do. If the Chinese people aren't still being oppressed, then why haven't we seen any protests?

It's because people are afraid to protest.

Re:Slashdot in China

[MrKaos]

Can you even access slashdot from within China? Seems to me if you are in China you have 'No Rights On-line', come to think of it, if you are in China you have 'No Rights At-All'.

Now we know what it is like to live under a government that the people fear. A government so concerned about loosing face in the Olympics that they did everything they could do to embarrass themselves and prove what everyone has been saying about them all along. That they are a group of thugs prepared to subdue anyone that gets in their way. I'm sure you'll censor that Mr Hu Jintao. president of a Totalitarian State.

So now English citizens can look forward to having their freedoms raped in the name of 'Protecting the Olympics from Terrorism legislations' and the television stations can conclude their coverage with 'We will now return you to your regularly scheduled apathy'.

I don't see why my post is modded as a troll. Not enough was said about China suppressing Tibet during the Olympics and that's what it is, suppression. China has been occupying Tibet for a long time, intimidating Taiwan and it's own people. This is not a criticism of the Chinese people who at the moment don't have the voice to stop their own government from doing these things or a lulled into apathy by the western way of life. There is a different kind of wisdom in the west, it comes from people who are prepared to continue to challenge oppression.

The Beijing Olympics have proved beyond a doubt that China is not a communist state, it is a Totalitarian state. The Chinese government proved what they set out to disprove. My image of the Olympics will be the Chinese special police surrounding the Olympic flame in every country, fake fireworks, the national anthem being mimed, excluding athletes because they weren't pretty enough and finally banning a few protest songs. The Chinese Government has brought shame on themselves by proving they are what they say they are not, by proving they could not rise above their own brutality and not exploring - even for a moment - if another way could work for their people. It truly proves how fragile the Chinese leaderships ideals are, that even the most flimsy dissent, even from another country, cannot be tolerated.

Whereas before I was ambivalent towards Chinese government I am certain now.The emperor has no clothes.

Re:Slashdot in China

[LynnwoodRooster]

Ni hao lin ju! I'm over in the Minhang District, two blocks north of the indoor skiing center. I live half my life here in China (mostly Shanghai, with time spent in Suzhou and Ningbo as well), and the other half in the US, and I fully concur with your statements. The reality is that China is not as oppressive as the Western media likes to make it out to be, nor is it as free as the US. But it is opening up more and more...

Re:Slashdot in China

[sydneyfong]

The last protest I saw in China turned bloody, and it was a telling message of what the Chinese government is prepared to do. If the Chinese people aren't still being oppressed, then why haven't we seen any protests?

I must admit that I'm not particularly informed on this subject, but as far as I know, there *are* countless protests happening in China, although not about freedoms and (political) rights. More like corrupt officials destroying livelihoods of people and forcing them to revolt (like taking away their lands/homes).

Re:Slashdot in China

[tresriogrande]

I would say China, and its population, corrects itself much faster than the U.S.

Re:Slashdot in China

[makomk]

*shrug* All media is biased. There's Western media with a definite pro-Chinese government bias too, such as much of the Murdoch-owned press (he has business interests there). The issues with the Chinese media are more serious:

• Systemic pro-government bias, enforced by government restrictions and ownership (apparently not as bad as it used to be)
• Press self-censorship due to the risk of being sacked or arrested for reporting things that make the government uncomfortable.
• The ability to suppress stories that embarrass the government as a result. (The protests during the torch relays were never going to be one of these, since it was not only not going to embarrass the government but could in fact be used to help prop it up, if correctly spun as an attack on China.) Full pre-press censorship isn't practical anymore, but they can still do it for important stories.
• China is suffering from widespread government corruption at multiple levels, aided by a lack of media oversight and a tendency to deal with the people kicking up a fuss rather than the corruption itself. (Wikipedia seems to reckon that the media is now willing to report local corruption, but I think reporting anything more major than that is dangerous.)
• Lack of reporting on governmental screw-ups and dubious acts means they can get away with far more than they would be able to otherwise. (This is helped by some fairly impressive whitewashing of history.)
• Dependence on Xinhua (effectively part of the Chinese government) for international news, due to not being able to afford reporters abroad and to censorship of foreign news sources.

There are other issues within China too (such as the rather inaccurate grasp of history available to its citizens). Admittedly, things are more complicated than they might seem at first, but the issues are there and real.

Question of Motivation

[VocationalZero]

From the article

"It seems like suspending iTunes is punishment for iTunes, but really it doesn't hurt iTunes, it hurts us," said a note on Chinese Apple fan site macfans.com.cn, according to the AP.

Do Chinese leaders actually think what they are doing punishes iTunes? Mayhaps, a more devious conclusion; like the applications to protest in the "authorized protest zone", they are trying to incite outrage among hidden dissidents to... strengthen their unpaid labor force.

Or maybe its just the technologically incompetent trying to rule the unruly propaganda machine that is technology with an iron (outdated; see steel) fist. Or both?

New moderation request

[Crash Culligan]

+0 Funny until logic like that becomes commonplace

I, for one, welcome our Alanis Morissette, banning

[Anonymous Coward]

overlords.

ooooh, 40 downloads

[SmallFurryCreature]

That will send a strong message to the chinese leaders, a country with over a billion people in a world of 6 billion people and a olympic event involving hundreds if not thousands of athletes and their support staff. 40 downloads.

Guess that shows just how much athletes really care about peace and such.

Did I download it? No, but then I don't try to pretend that my sporting event is anything else then an ego trip to prove I am better then everyone else.

Frankly, the truth is nobody really cares about Tibet. Oh we might buy the t-shirt but we also buy t-shirts with the logo of a soda brand or whatever band the music industry pushed on us.

Show me an athlete who refuses his medal to make a point and then I might think the olympics are any different from the soccer world championship.

Re:ooooh, 40 downloads

[Anonymous Coward]

Show me an athlete who refuses his medal to make a point.

That already happened, didn't it? Though it had nothing to do with censorship I suppose.

Re:ooooh, 40 downloads

[initialE]

In a day and age when athletes are bought by the highest bidder to go and compete for them, you're asking for them to take the moral high ground?

Re:ooooh, 40 downloads

[ksd1337]

Oh we might buy the t-shirt but we also buy t-shirts with the logo of a soda brand or whatever band the music industry pushed on us.

And the most pathetic part is that those t-shirts or soda cans are most likely made in China.

Re:Michael Phleps

[Anonymous Coward]

I... erm... ah, sorry, I was going to reply to you, but you mentioning Jews and the Olympics so much together made me think of hot Jewish girls in leotards, and I sort of got sidetracked. Excuse me.

A better idea.

[crhylove]

As much as China's censorship is abhorrent in every sense of the word, we have similar problems in this country with corporate control. Look at comcast.

A much better idea would be free and open ad hoc wifi, not just in China, but globally. You can communicate with any router in range of another router, and we could use fiber or parabolic dishes for the long hops.

I'm really tired of paying $80 a month for crap Net service.

Re:A better idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as China's censorship is abhorrent in every sense of the word, we have similar problems in this country with corporate control. Look at comcast. [..] I'm really tired of paying $80 a month for crap Net service.

Wow, you're right. That's exactly like what's going on in China.

Ah, if only you could live in a society that has so much freedom that your greatest concern would be to be deprived of the free high-speed internet that you are entitled to. A utopia, of course, but a man can dream.

Excellent. *rubs hands*

[Anonymous Coward]

So how about attaching pro-Tibet text to many websites and see how many sites China can do without? Must be a breaking point where the whole web goes dark when everyone mentions, y'know, tiananmen square. A lot.

it's rather simple

[Neuropol]

begin boycotting all things china.

maybe they'll figure it out eventually ... and grow up.

Re:it's rather simple

[rufus t firefly]

begin boycotting all things china. maybe they'll figure it out eventually ... and grow up.

We've been failing miserably at boycotting China-related stuff right now. Too important to strut America's National Wang to care about little things like human rights violations.

!Ironic!

[Facegarden]

Soo... I hate to say it (err, okay, that's a lie, i love pointing these out!), but china blocking a song protesting china blocking things isn't irony! It's just not!

Irony is (roughly) when something happens that is the opposite of what expected... but if you criticize a tyrant... you can expect to get censored!
-Taylor

Re:!Ironic!

[Anonymous Coward]

Artists on the compilation include Alanis Morissette, Garbage, Imogen Heap, Moby, Sting, Suzanne Vega, Underworld and others.

You're ironic. In this thread, at least.

Re:!Ironic!

[onefriedrice]

Irony is (roughly) when something happens that is the opposite of what expected...

Huh? No, that would be a poor or at least a very shallow definition of irony. If irony were only how you describe it, then you are correct: this situation would not be ironic. But irony includes a lot more than the unexpected.

Look up the irony wikipedia page and check a few dictionaries. I didn't tag this article as ironic, but given the normal definition, it is indeed an example of irony under normal definitions.

Re:!Ironic!

[Facegarden]

Well, i actually have read the Wikipedia page before, because my friend and i have a thing about pointing out non-ironic situations that are labeled ironic, and i did say my definition was rough, but it more or less follows with what Wikipedia says, which is:

"Situational irony is the disparity of intention and result: when the result of an action is contrary to the desired or expected effect."

So, contrary.. opposite... since I admitted I was being rough my definition really isn't that bad.

And going along with that, a song that tried to educate people about censorship getting censored isn't irony, it's just unfortunate... If the song trying to educate people about censorship somehow ended up reducing people's awareness of censorship, THAT would be ironic... Or if the song spurred a reaction from the government that increased their level of censorship... THAT would be ironic too. But just that song being censored doesn't necessarily indicate a large increase in censorship, so i don't think this situation counts.

Trust me, most people don't get irony, and it's actually a pretty complex concept, but i'd like to think i understand it.
-Taylor

Oh boohoo

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no problem when every business in the world cooperates with China, but when China does what China does, we cry foul? What are you going to do? Withdraw your precious shop from China? Stop buying their cheap stuff? They've got us cornered and they know it. Let me tell you what will happen: The album will disappear from the Chinese iTunes and the great firewall will allow access to the good citizen Apple again.

Slave labor combined with unchecked capitalism rules the world. It will take a lot more than a couple tourists with "Free Tibet" signs to change the world we live in, especially because we keep cheering for "our" companies, even though they would sell each one of us to get in on the action.

They need the bandwidth to launch SQL injects

[Anonymous Coward]

Why waste it on iTunes when there's plenty of servers to hit.

Re:Michael Phleps

[Anonymous Coward]

Hot Jewish girls?

Like in the Deutsche ovens?

iTunes is back!

[oblivinated]

I think as soon as the "Songs for Tibet" album was taken off the frontpage, it was allowed back.

Re:iTunes is back!

[websam]

I agree, this is just politic!

F*ck China!

[Anonymous Coward]

It may not be politically correct, nor will it be as internationally 'bonding' as the Beijing Olympiad, but f*ck China. F*ck 'em all. Or send a UN force in to 'liberate' all chinese....but for crying out loud, let's stop this eternal 'outrage' about human rights abuse and state censorship: crying 'fire' and not bringing any water only makes us look complacent and silly....

If we ignore them for another century or so, we'll both be happy: the chinese won't have to complain about rational people interfering with human righ...err..government policy, and we won't have to waste our time being indignated over a life that 1 billion people apparently choose to life.

I say 'choose', as I hold the firm belief that when one billion people would raise up against ANY 'oppressor', they would overthrow him within days, if not hours.

Re:F*ck China!

[billcopc]

Thing is, the Chinese people don't see it the same way as you and I, because this is how it's been for years. Boil a frog slowly...

Free speech is a delicate battle in the rest of the world, because it gets in the way of government power mongers. In China, they've had power mongers forever, so the concept of free speech does not exist at all - it gets squashed anytime it pops up, "to protect society".

It's a whole different world over there, one that's very difficult for us to completely understand.

Re:F*ck China!

[sydneyfong]

You probably don't realize how spot on you are.
Particularly the last line.

For a nation which has endured more than a century of unending (civil) wars, the loss of some civil-political rights in exchange for "stability" is (or more precisely, "was") indeed the choice made. You could even say that the choice was made particularly in the spring/summer of 1989, during the Tienanmen incident. In that atmosphere, the people could have revolted, and toppled the ruling party... it didn't happen.

Yet things are changing. I believe that in a few decades civil rights in China would improve just as its economy had in the past three decades. And if not, I firmly believe that there would be a number of Chinese who'd risk everything to achieve this goal (as opposed to "outrages" on the other side of the globe without real action).

Re:F*ck China!

[sydneyfong]

The concept of free speech does not exist per se, at least it isn't viewed as a fundamental, inherent right. But then the Chinese don't have an inherent fondness of suppressing speech. The problem is the difference in priorities.

The biggest hurdle for westerners in understanding "Chinese values" is that the "fundamental" value in Chinese political theory (since probably 3000 years ago) is the "nation", and "national unity" is as sacred as the constitution is to Americans. Everything else is second. Like it or not, it's the thing that binds the whole country and its people together. (As to why this is the case, you really have to dig into Chinese history... and I think that's a subject with a huge learning curve for westerners...) That's why you can't advocate Tibet independence in China (without facing dire consequences), but other things that don't affect the stability of the political structure are usually OK in practice.

If you understand that, then you might understand why the Chinese are so upset when westerners keep bringing up the Tibet issue.

Not blocked!

[unicorn_2003_1]

Seriously, I'm in China and iTunes Store is all fine for me. Get a life.

Re:Not blocked!

[bdenton42]

Seriously, I'm in China and iTunes Store is all fine for me. Get a life.

And you can download "Songs for Tibet"?

Re:Not blocked!

[ThesQuid]

Seriously, I'm in China and iTunes Store is all fine for me. Get a life.

And you can download "Songs for Tibet"?

Yes, I just fired up the album no problem.

Western Romanticism

[Nymz]

Many young people haven't been well versed in the Western romanticism of Communist China, though recently Obama did idealize China's transportation infrastructure in a effort to promote investment in our own. I recommend the The Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party. The difference in our cultures is a real eye opener.

Re:Western Romanticism

[Anonymous Coward]

Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party.

1. WE are in control Muthafucker
2. 40 million dead and counting.
3. Don't make me re-educate you.
4. If 12 year olds are good enough for Mao, then they are good enough for the Gymnast team.
5. Pollution? What pollution?
6. One kid. It's the LAW.
7. Never too young for a job!
9. Never met a technology we couldn't steal.

Re:Western Romanticism

[Anonymous Coward]

Reminds me of the west 100 years ago....

Re:Western Romanticism

[bdenton42]

#8 is missing... was it blocked by the Firewall of China?

You missed:

10. Lead paint in childrens toys makes them taste better.

11. Aquadots: Bringing brainwashing the kids to a whole new level.

There's no better time to bash China

[shuying]

the olympic days are so awesome! advocating splitting China, what do you expect in return? how about supporting terrorist attacks on american in the name of freedom? you know what, probably 99% of the 1.4 billion people in china support this very decision to block itunes, though they may disagree with other censorship measures. those western "protesters" in beijing, they are cowards. they only "protest" in english. i bet the moment they dare "protest" in chinese, they would be crashed by infuriated average chinese. yeah, "free tibet", because that's just what your media tells you to, because china is by default evil, therefore you don't really need to know what actually happens in china.

Re:There's no better time to bash China

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right. In the name of the entire Western Civilization I humbly apologize for supporting those evil Tibetan troops invading China and smashing Chinese culture to bits.

I for one welcome our new chinese overlords.

I don't need no proof!

[BitterOldGUy]

There's no scientific proof that our way is the universal right!

What's this "science"?

God has said that we are right! Look at our money. It's says "Under God".

Who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's so funny. Why people got so mad when China block this, block that? You should be happy because all your hard working info will not benefit the Chinese. You should jump for joy. Cheer up! If you are so sick of China. Just keep it out of your mind and don't talk about it. Use a Chinese saying: don't see it, don't bother with it. One more thing, I don't disagree with your position. But, giving what US had done, it's just that you have no credibility what so ever. So, just keep your thoughts, happy thoughts to yourself, and get China out of you mind.

Ironically?

[torstenvl]

I'm boycotting this discussion (except, obviosuly, for this post) for incorrect use of "ironically"

Re:Ironically?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with you, but an incorrect use of "ironically" in a slashdot post that mentions Alanis Morrisette... that's on its way. ;)

Re:Ironically?

[reallyjoel]

Good, you just saved me a top-post of my own.

Re:Ironically?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, so am I.

Too afraid to see who they are

[microbox]

I second that. They are cowards - afraid to look in the mirror. Now some chinese person's going to reply to this and tell me about all the western hypocrisy, but unlike most westerners, they'll never turn their gaze upon themselves.

This behaviour reminds me of the type of person who is so self-absorbed that they don't know what a complete joke people think they are. All the while, they try to sell you on their big opinion of themselves.

The chinese actions would be hilarious, except that so much human suffering is involved. China is completely out of touch with itself.

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[Lafeek]

This behaviour reminds me of the type of person who is so self-absorbed that they don't know what a complete joke people think they are. All the while, they try to sell you on their big opinion of themselves.

Oh, you mean, like Americans?


(It's a joke, laugh.)

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[sydneyfong]

In fact, westerners who are bashing China are usually completely out of touch with China.

Sometimes I myself would think it hilarious, except that some of these ignorant people are actually making non-trivial impact.

I mean, it's not that the criticisms towards China is unfounded -- it's that most people crying fowl almost never make any constructive, feasible suggestions. Of course, they think free speech and democracy are silver bullets, and prescribe heavy doses of them, because they work instantly when you install a shrink wrapped version onto any country. The only thing holding it back is the evil, EVIL dictator whose greatest pleasure is to oppress people. Once you take down that EVIL dictator everything works PERFECTLY.

Seriously, if anybody indeed has constructive ideas on how to substantially improve the situation in China, I'm sure a lot of people (including Chinese) would lend you their ears. But if the best you could do is whine about a possibly non-event (as reported by other slashdotters that iTunes is actually accessible), don't be surprised if you're simply ignored.

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[Rich0]

Seriously, if anybody indeed has constructive ideas on how to substantially improve the situation in China, I'm sure a lot of people (including Chinese) would lend you their ears.

Uh, how about hold elections? The kind where anybody can run? And how about having a free press where one isn't punished for expressing one's opinions? That would be a good start and in the long run would substantially improve the situation.

In fact, westerners who are bashing China are usually completely out of touch with China.

Yup - you've hit that nail on the head. Why, most westerners actually think that the citizens of Taiwan actually want to be a separate country! What a crazy idea - fortunately, the People's Daily dubunks that rubbish and points out how they've been oppressed for decades and that the best thing the world can do is get out of the way and let mainland China liberate them.

The next thing those crazy westerners will be trying to tell us is that the Chinese governement actually masaccred students in Tienneman Square! What a load of propaganda!

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[Gerhardius]

Insightful?!?! There should be a rating for "poppycock." How often do those in power in Western nations "turn their gaze upon themselves?" Governments behave in a very similar manner towards the outside world regardless of their treatment of their own citizens. Those holding power in Beijing look upon the period of a "free" Tibet from 1913 to 1950 as an aberration and not the result of natural forces of history, and trying to change that POV through admonition and protests is a joke.

China is an authoritarian government concerned with keeping order and power within the hands of a select few. Truthfully they are only a few degrees removed from every other government in the world. What has happened is that the folks who used to cry for East Timor needed another cause celebre and Tibet has been groomed for this since the CIA started funding the Dalai Lama. Then the oppressed members of Falun Gong started their own media campaign and protests around the world. Falun Gong loves a martyr, just like the Communist labor organizers in "In Dubious Battle," knowingly pushing the limits of a strictly controlled society in a quest for headlines.

Human Rights granted by international charter are truly idealist. Most societies cope with tremendous restrictions because in the daily struggle to survive some things don't seem to matter that much. Are the Chinese "self-absorbed?" Probably no more so than any other nationality. The US is probably the best Western example of navel gazing while blundering about causing suffering in places known and unknown. Right now Chinese perfidy is confined within their borders, whereas US and Western activities go on all over the world.

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[sydneyfong]

Why, most westerners actually think that the citizens of Taiwan actually want to be a separate country!

The next thing those crazy westerners will be trying to tell us is that the Chinese governement actually masaccred students in Tienneman Square! What a load of propaganda!

You think this is funny? Sarcastic?

You're just proving my point.

The current Taiwanese president's (who was popularly elected) stance on Taiwan's status is that he wouldn't push for independence, instead preferring to tread the fine line of the current status quo. The Taiwanese aren't actually loathing for (re)union with China, but they aren't unequivocally for independence either.

And I didn't read People's Daily about the Tienanmen Square event. Did you use CNN/Foxnews as your sources? Have you watched this before? http://www.tsquare.tv/ (note: it isn't made by the Chinese)

And as for the more serious items...

Uh, how about hold elections? The kind where anybody can run? And how about having a free press where one isn't punished for expressing one's opinions? That would be a good start and in the long run would substantially improve the situation.

Considering the fact that most of China is still in poverty, how would you resolve the problem of buying votes? How would you prevent "free press" from inciting revolts and bringing the whole society into chaos? [note: this isn't far fetched, it has more than once in the past few decades] And if you think your suggestions are really insightful, I'd have to break your bubble. The Chinese government tried to move towards this direction two decades ago, and it sort of backfired, resulting in the Tienanmen incident. The government had been cautious to try it again (but it seems they are gradually opening up again in recent years). I'm not making this up... go watch the documentary (above link) yourself.

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[Rich0]

The current Taiwanese president's (who was popularly elected) stance on Taiwan's status is that he wouldn't push for independence, instead preferring to tread the fine line of the current status quo. The Taiwanese aren't actually loathing for (re)union with China, but they aren't unequivocally for independence either.

That is called diplomacy. The issue of Taiwan is a source of nationalistic pride in China and the issue is used like September 11th is in the USA. When you're a country not much biger than Luxemborg on the border of a nation with one of the largest militaries in the world who is looking for an excuse to invade you choose your words carefully.

Somehow I doubt that most Taiwan citizens would prefer Chinese citizenship. It would be a complete step backwards for them. As it is they have most of the conveniences of Chinese citizenship (due to Chinese policy) and none of the downsides. Kind of like Puerto Rico in the US...

And I didn't read People's Daily about the Tienanmen Square event. Did you use CNN/Foxnews as your sources?

Uh, I never said anything about the People's Daily coverage of Tienamen Square. They were used in a different illustration. Even so, I'm sure their coverage of the event was VERY tame.

Have you watched this before? http://www.tsquare.tv/ (note: it isn't made by the Chinese)

Actually, I haven't - I may take the time to do so (thanks for the link). I noted that they did have a link to Frontline on that site and I did see their episode dedicated to the aftermath of the incident.

I actually watch fairly little TV news programming - I tend to get most of my news on the web from RSS feeds (a fair variety of them). I doubt you'd ever catch me watching Fox News. If anything I'd be more likely to watch BBC's World News America or something along those lines for a broader perspective (I DVR it even if I don't often watch it).

I do strongly disagree with your assessment that Democracy simply wouldn't work in China. I don't disagree that it would be disruptive at first. There is a lot of history that the West went through prior to Democracy taking off and in many places that history simply doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that Democracy isn't ultimately what is needed in China (and everywhere else for that matter). Democracy isn't really a great form of government, but it just happens to be better than every other form out there (save appointing me dictator of the world). One thing that does tend to improve it seems to be the proportional system of representation used in most European states - not having two entrenched parties seems to help reduce the vote-buying phenomenon which is a big problem in the USA. Sure, Americans are a lot wealthier than the average Chinese, but that just means the politicians have to tax people and buy their votes using their own money...

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[sydneyfong]

I don't disagree that it would be disruptive at first. There is a lot of history that the West went through prior to Democracy taking off and in many places that history simply doesn't exist. That doesn't mean that Democracy isn't ultimately what is needed in China

I agree that democracy is ultimately needed in China. It's just that it won't work if you try to do it overnight. You understand it might be disruptive at first, but there's a huge risk that it's not going to be merely disruptive -- it's going to be devastating. Changing the political structure of a nation with 1.3B people isn't going to be an easy task. Sure outsiders who aren't going to directly bear this risk can babble and criticize all they want, but there's reason for the Chinese to be more wary.

Somehow I doubt that most Taiwan citizens would prefer Chinese citizenship. It would be a complete step backwards for them. As it is they have most of the conveniences of Chinese citizenship (due to Chinese policy) and none of the downsides. Kind of like Puerto Rico in the US...

Talk about that. As a Hong Kong citizen I'm actually having the conveniences of Chinese citizenship without any of the downsides. I'm not sure Taiwanese are having conveniences of Chinese citizenship though (correct me if I'm wrong). And I might sound like a Chinese apologist but you'll have to pry the freedoms we have in Hong Kong from my cold dead hands.

And as for what most Taiwan citizens think... my understanding is that they're mostly tired of all the independence/reunion crap. There are people who want to push for outright independence, and maybe a select few reunionists, but (now) most don't really bother. The status quo has worked for more than half a century, so why bother changing? It might be politically incorrect to say this, but Taiwan has always been defacto independent -- the issue is official (and international) recognition of this status.

Sure, China's military and economic power certainly influenced this a lot, and they have certainly played quite a number of dirty tricks to get to the present situation, but there are other subtle things at work. The situation isn't as clear cut as you (or your post) seem to suggest.

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[Rich0]

I'm not completely certain, but I believe that since the Chinese government's official position is that Taiwan is just a renegade province they offer Chinese passports to anybody who asks for one. That gives Taiwanese easy access to mainland China. The more the Taiwanese take advantage of this the more China's claim is bolstered, so for them it is a political back-door.

It wouldn't surprise me if there are some limits on this, and I don't profess to know all the details. However, I do believe I read about the somewhere.

As far as democracy goes - I'm not sure that China needs an overnight revolution, but the argument that they're not quite ready yet could last 400 years. At some point you just need to start making changes.

Even if the government posted a 15 year plan to move to democracy it would probably be hailed as a good thing - especially if freedoms were granted early on, with clear education efforts in the plan to make democracy work. You could even use a progressive system in which voting rights are granted by education or income - with a new bracket being given the vote each year.

The problem is that right now the Chinese government makes itself an obvious target for criticism with the great firewall. That is like a relic from Stalinism...

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[Weedlekin]

"One thing that does tend to improve it seems to be the proportional system of representation used in most European states"

People who actually live in countries with proportional representation will tell you that it tends to result in a situation where the party most people voted for ends up having to form coalitions with tiny minority groups that only represent a specific region or special interest who demand all sorts of concessions (pork barrels for US readers) in return for voting for (or abstaining from voting against) legislation.

Re:Too afraid to see who they are

[sydneyfong]

I profess I know nothing about the details, but China if anything is more wary of Taiwan than any other country.

One of the platforms of Taiwan president Ma is to allow direct cross strait flights (which last I heard doesn't exist), instead of going through Hong Kong. You'd think China would allow any person from Taiwan to enter its borders?

Even here in Hong Kong, we need to apply for a passport-like permit to enter mainland China. In 99% of the cases it's straightforward, but those who are "blacklisted" for supporting "forbidden causes" like Tibet independence, certain pro-democracy groups, etc. cannot even enter the mainland, even though they are legally Chinese citizens.

Re:Way to go, athletes!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not protesting a tyranny hosting the olympics worked so fine back in '36.

Mod Parent Funny

[Nymz]

Slashdot should really let everyone moderate once in a while.

Re:Mod Parent Funny

[BrokenHalo]

That was funny? I thought it was scary from several perspectives.

Maybe my hilarity gland is atrophied... :-(

Re:Mod Parent Funny

[Nymz]

That was funny? I thought it was scary from several perspectives.

Ok, perhaps calling it a 'clever presentation' would be a more specific and appropriate moderation, but it's funny because it's so true, unfortunately.

It's a matter of degree

[microbox]

What's even funnier is that you start talking about how we in "The West" hold the government to account for its failures. Have you been reading some of the Slashdot articles of the past seven years?

Here's a really simple idea. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

It is impossible to compare the power of Chinese leaders to western regimes, because in the west we have so many more checks and balances. One of those checks and balances is public outrage. Sure it's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than anything else out there.

Why not contemplate how you can make your country a better place, then stewing in negative thoughts with some false sense of entitlement you have that you should be living in some kind of enlightenment.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[kaos07]

Woo, turning general ideas/thoughts/opinions into personal attacks against posters. My favourite part about Slashdot =)

Re:It's a matter of degree

[microbox]

lol! I guess i feel like I met you a hundred times before, all the best =)

Re:It's a matter of degree

[samsamsamj]

So you think your system is the best. Great, go ahead and continue believing so. But I do have a problem when you extrapolate your idealized system to something like "moral standard", "universal value", blah blah and try to force it into the reality, and not only to yourself but also to everyone else.

There's a question that has been raised by a number of learned people already (the most recent one here: http://thechinabeat.blogspot.com/2008/07/smoke-and-mirrors-china-and-india.html):

If you were born poor (which 90% of Chinese are), which country would you prefer to live, the totalitarian China or the democratic India?

Their answer is unanimously China. It comes at no surprise that the recent Pew survey showed a whooping 82% Chinese approve their government, the highest in the world. If the Chinese are happy, why all the fuss? Can't you just mind you own business?

Perhaps you mean good, and truly believe democracy will bring good to China. As a Chinese I thank you, but at the same time would like to remind you that it's up to Chinese to prioritize what they want and what to achieve, on their own terms. Demonizing their country or government is not going to achieve anything.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[Anonymous Coward]

Democracy wouldn't do well in china, because they don't understand it. Democracy is more a tradition than a set of rules. The reason why 82% of chinese approve of their government is because of institutionalized delusion. The germans once loved the nazis too.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[bds1986]

Ah, 82% were satisfied with the economy, which isn't unexpected given the rapid growth of recent years. Only 65% were satisfied that the government was doing a good job "on issues that were of most importance to them".

Source.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[samsamsamj]

Yeah I get it. Chinese are all brainwashed neo-nazis. Try harder, you even may make them all believe the Jewish God as well as invading Iraq is a godsend gift to the Iraqis.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[samsamsamj]

OK my memory tricks me. 86% Chinese are satisfied with where their country is heading, that's the data I want to cite.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[sydneyfong]

One of those checks and balances is public outrage

My impression is that public outrage does absolutely nothing in the USA...
You really have to give a better example.

And you really don't know anything about China if you think public outrage doesn't work there...
I mean, without the institutional check and balances (eg. democratic elections, independent judiciary, separation of powers, etc.), public outrage is the only thing that may actually work in China...

Re:It's a matter of degree

[microbox]

My impression is that public outrage does absolutely nothing in the USA... You really have to give a better example.

In Canada, the Mulroney government went from a majority to 2 seats, in a single election. The US seems a little too nationalistic for that, but the west is bigger than the US.

Re:It's a matter of degree

[sydneyfong]

Indeed. I was talking about the US since most people here seems to be from the US, and "the last seven years of slashdot articles" were mostly stuff about the US (unless they were rants about China's human rights abuses).

But then my main point was really that public outrage works everywhere. Your example highlights the advantages of a representative election system.

I'll give you a better example of "public outrage". I live in Hong Kong. A few years ago, the government tried to pass a bill that basically introduced the "Chinese" laws of state secrets, national security etc. (and you all know how broad the definition of "state secrets" is in China). It caused a public outrage. The legislature was composed of roughly half pro-government legislators and half anti-government legislators, with the pro-govt having a slight edge, and as the bill neared passing, 500 thousand people protested on the streets (which is almost 10% of the total population in Hong Kong, a really sizable number), causing some legislators to rethink their votes and eventually the bill didn't pass.

That's not the full story, but I hope you get the gist of it. What I learned from the incident? This is the kind of protests that actually works. Sometimes waiting a few years for the next election... doesn't work for all cases.

ironically?

[Anonymous Coward]

wtf is ironic about that?

Look in the fsking mirror.

[microbox]

Maybe, but China's history of human rights abuses speaks for itself.


If its history we're talking about, then what about America's history of human rights abuse (slave trade anyone?), or the UK (slaves again, plus that whole empire thing, and navvies).

America owns up to it's history. China tries to revise it's history. Look in the fsking mirror.

Makes you think

[Vexorian]

Would the US ban an album called songs for Guantanamo? Hmnn, interesting.

Re:Makes you think

[EllisDees]

No. It would not.

Re:Makes you think

[chainLynx]

Makes you think why someone hasn't made that album yet. Guantanamo Bay deserves a better artistic critique than Harlold and Kumar are able to provide.

Re:Makes you think

[sydneyfong]

Because nobody cares.

Re:Makes you think

[Vexorian]

Yeah I agree, it would just force the media not to give it much attention...

Well, I was just saying, people and artists are getting very good at complaining about the Tibet situation, which is a good thing and all, but some of them are also very good at looking away when the abuses are done by their own country.

You could build a TOR relay into Firefox

[Colin Smith]

It would pretty much make the chinese firewall moot.

 

Re:You could build a TOR relay into Firefox

[Spatial]

Story: 'China Blocks Firefox'

Re:You could build a TOR relay into Firefox

[catwh0re]

you can just turn on TOR/similar services and the iTunes Store block is no more, the Chinese firewall is a joke and more a serving suggestion for the Chinese mainstream.

Re:You could build a TOR relay into Firefox

[Pichu0102]

I'm pretty sure there used to be a variant of Firefox with Tor baked into it called Torpark. Not sure what happened to it though.

I am shocked!

[JoeD]

I am shocked - SHOCKED - that a repressive totalitarian regime would censor something criticizing it.

Oh wait. I'm not.

I'm shocked that people keep forgetting that China is ruled by a repressive totalitarian regime.

I do no' thin' it means what you thin' it means.

[The Monster]

You have a better sense of "ironic" than the original post author. The Chinese government blocking access to criticism of the Chinese government blocking access to criticism is not "ironic"; it's "recursive".

I'm disappointed with the athletes

[billcopc]

Downloading something is a pretty modest show of solidarity because hardly anyone will notice.

I know the Olympics aren't supposed to be "politicized", but let's not be hypocrites: it's ALL about politics, and the fact that they are in Beijing this year is a huge political stunt.

If a bunch of athletes want to protest China's activities, I think they should go all the way and have a walk off. Just get to the starting line, wait for the buzzer, then stand there like an idiot until the others finish their run. All eyes will be on that one person, and the media will be all over them, ready to deliver that protester's sound bite around the world to billions of TV drones.

Now that's an act of protest!

Re:Way to go, athletes!

[billcopc]

Dude! The fact that the olympics are in China in the first place is a huge political stunt. Everyone knew this kind of shit would happen, but still, the IOC wanted to give China a chance to show the world how it had changed for the better. Indeed, a few political/human-rights issues were at the heart of that deal, but as soon as China had secured the olympics, they went right back to their abusive habits. They got what they wanted, and they decided to show the world they're nobody's bitch.

How ironic.

..but

[BrokenHalo]

...though I know it's a solecism to reply to myself, I should mention that I will always defend the right to arm bears... ;-)

Violation of WTO Rules

[adjwilli]

Bill Clinton pushed for Chinese admission into the WTO as a means of liberalizing China through open international trade. The US has already accused China of illegally hindering its importation of US movies and music (http://articles.latimes.com/2007/oct/12/business/fi-wto12). Completely banning the iTunes Store (the largest online music retailer, which is US-based) further these charges.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in China and so I decided to install itunes and see if I could visit the store.....worked just fine for me. Sometimes the connection is just wonky, for example Hotmail doesn't work once in a while, when it happens just wait a day or two and it will work.

Now, youtube and sourceforge actually were blocked, but were unblocked within a week or two.

Re:Way to go, athletes!

[bnenning]

I mean, you could have gone TWO FREAKING WEEKS without a political statement, right?

Sure, and the Chinese government could have gone two weeks without massive lies and censorship. But people don't change that easily.

Thanks China!

[Anonymous Coward]

I hadn't heard of this album before, now I might check it out!

Re:I do no' thin' it means what you thin' it means

[MrHanky]

Yes, but "Isn't it recursive" just doesn't roll off the tongue well enough for a hit single. I'm sure it would sell extraordinarily well to the Slashdot crowd, though. Who would've thought... it figures.

Not blocked in Shanghai

[Anonymous Coward]

You sure it is blocked? Living in Shanghai China and I can access ITunes no problem....

Other Sites are blocked though.

But Apple Blocks/Censors Too!!

[BSDetector]

I clearly think censorship of any kind by anyone is just WRONG! That includes China. But why is there no criticism in Slashdot of Apple for their heavy-handed censorship of forum postings?

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=2173/

Slashdot hypocrisy is action? Go ahead and mod me down more. That's a form of censorship too!

Re:But Apple Blocks/Censors Too!!

[greyhueofdoubt]

Censorship is typically understood to mean the redaction of inconvenient literature or media by the ruling government. Private companies and individuals are exempt from the term censorship. A newspaper 86ing a flamebait editorial, a newsgroup cutting out useless or inflammatory comments, or a homeowner removing graffiti from his house: these are all perfectly fine. You may, if you wish, post your critical comments about Apple, Inc. on any number of apple-related websites besides the actual apple-owned support site.

The difference is that you are free to chose another company or private entity to solicit, while the one gov't you have is the ONLY gov't you have (and that gov't wields real power over you).

Let's not put Apple, Inc. on the same moral plane as national governments, ok?

-b

Re:But Apple Blocks/Censors Too!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Censorship is typically understood to mean the redaction of inconvenient literature or media by the ruling government. Private companies and individuals are exempt from the term censorship.

Nope, censoring means "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable". There's no reason to be sloppy with your language just to make your point.

Re:But Apple Blocks/Censors Too!!

[burnitdown]

Censorship is typically understood to mean the redaction of inconvenient literature or media by the ruling government. Private companies and individuals are exempt from the term censorship.

What if a company, like Apple, runs the #1 forums on the topic that have become the de facto standard source of information?

It's like Apple censoring Wikipedia, but because of your categorical logic, you are unwilling to consider that option.

Re:But Apple Blocks/Censors Too!!

[BSDetector]

My initial smart-ass thoughts for a reply are to say that how dare we even think of lowering Apple's god-like moral plane. But I digress. Censorship can be applied by any organization - it is not a behavior reserved to governments. Your reply is just so typical of all the Apple apologists - Apple can do no wrong! You know that 1984 Apple Super Bowl commercial was more ironic re: this topic. Read the book - you might be enlightened. Until then - keep you head in the sand.

Re:But Apple Blocks/Censors Too!!

[greyhueofdoubt]

I didn't mean to polarize the discussion by using Apple as the example; it was already being discussed. What I said applies to any company and I resent being called an Apple apologist just because I don't think companies and governments should play by the same rules.

And OK, maybe I should revise my argument to accept that companies can indeed censor, but that they reserve and deserve the right to do so. This has nothing to do with Apple. I've erased comments on my blog because they were baseless, insulting, or profane (my family reads it as well as my crude coworkers). If I ran a company and I ran a support forum for my product, you're damn right I'd try to get rid of posts that basically amount to advertising for my competition. If I ran an advertising company, I wouldn't allow the KKK or the xtian right to buy space from me- it's my company and I'll choose what messages get associated with my name. That may be censorship, but I believe that I would be in the right by doing it. The government, like I said before, plays by a different set of rules.

-b

Currently modded at "0, Troll"

[burnitdown]

I consider modding this a troll an unwillingness to view it as a serious opinion, but I am serious.

There are two basic types of view of what America should be: world policeman, or citizen of the earth.

Growing up during the Cold War, I saw our government spend the best of our money and efforts fending off foreign adversaries and fighting pointless wars.

If we're world policeman, there's more of those wars coming.

If we're just a citizen of the earth, we defend our interests, mind our own business -- and we have a ton of cleanup to do within our own borders, in our own souls -- and let the Chinese do what they're gonna do. I don't care if they destroy Tibet, rape every first born child with a glue gun, and pour buckets of hot acid onto their women. It's their country and it should be their rules.

Like a neurotic neighbor, the West keeps going to countries like Viet Nam in the name of Good, and brings Evil because we're aware that what we're doing isn't absolutely right. We're finding excuses to avoid looking at our problems at home.

In my religion, Hinduism, we view all other religions as branches of Hinduism. So I find this passage from the Bible to be memorable:

3 And why behold the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but consider not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how will thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Matthew 7:3-5 (King James Version)

The West can't see that we've got a beam in our own eye, so we keep finding reasons to intervene elsewhere because we view ourselves as the God-given moral authority on planet earth.

I can't think of a more pretentious, misguided plan, nor one surer to leave behind fields of enemies growing stronger as we grow weak.

Re:Currently modded at "0, Troll"

[Jewbird]

That passage from Matthew is misguided in it application because there are cases when it is your brother who has a beam in his eye.

If everyone only focused on themselves and ignored problems elsewhere, we should all live as hermits.

As Martin Luther King observed, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Don't blame Americans

[burnitdown]

I think it's a habit of all dying regimes, dying nations and failing groups to engage in surrogate activities.

Americans aren't unique. They're just at the head of this trend in the West. The UK and Canada follow, and after that, mainland Europe.

It's a path to decay you can find outlined here:

The Republic

But it's far easier for people to go into denial, as you can see when a thread whose content is "They are cowards - afraid to look in the mirror. Now some chinese person's going to reply to this and tell me about all the western hypocrisy, but unlike most westerners, they'll never turn their gaze upon themselves." modded up above any more realistic commentary.

Why? It's easier to blame the Chinese than look at our own problems and realize we in the West should clean house first.

Re:Don't blame Americans

[ktappe]

It's easier to blame the Chinese than look at our own problems and realize we in the West should clean house first.

Now, America is deeply flawed in several ways, and I'm no fan of the Bush cabal (having protested against him on numerous occasions), and think Guantanamo is going to be a black eye on this country for a century to come. THAT SAID, I think your statements go too far. Show me anti-Bush bloggers or songwriters disappearing off the streets of NY or Chicago or LA, and I'll agree America's problems deserve more attention than China's. Show me major websites and other internet services blocked to Americans by the government, major religious movements crushed, single-party leaders in power for decades, and then you're proven right. Until then, you took your point too far. Yes, Bush/Cheney have done everything they can to get us there, and did make fearful strides towards totalitarianism, but the U.S. is not quite China yet.

Re:I do no' thin' it means what you thin' it means

[drinkypoo]

You have a better sense of "ironic" than the original post author.

Which begs the question...

Because you touch yourself at night.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think, rather than being out of touch with itself entirely, it is more focused on touching one specific part of itself more. This is mostly due to the fact that China only allows one child per family and condoms are not very accessible.

Max Headroom

[Anonymous Coward]

Bryce put the Censor computer in feedback mode and it just censored itself. Quite simple really...

[squawk!]

Re:Way to go, athletes!

[sydneyfong]

Well duh. Of course China is nobody's bitch...

The fact that you think giving China the right to host the Olympics is enough to make them your (or somebody's) bitch is simply ... hilarious.

The true communism

[Anonymous Coward]

Communism has never really been tried because people are people. Republics tend to work well for the same reason.

In short, communism as you think of it is impossible for any length of time in a group larger than one.

Re:The true communism

[Bonobo_Unknown]

Communism has never really been tried because people are people. Republics tend to work well for the same reason.

In short, communism as you think of it is impossible for any length of time in a group larger than one.

I think you're basically right, although among small groups of like minded people Communism might work, in fact the Open Source Movement shows under what kinds of conditions Communism might work. On the large scale Communism might just have to wait until we develop empathy and conciseness as a species rather than as individuals.

Why Tibet?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are so many good reasons to criticize the Chinese state, one of them being censorship. So why must everyone sheepishly adhere to some reactionary nationalist separatist campaign? Whenever the US want to destabilize a region, they use some wacko nationalists. If there is no nationalism, they create it. You cry out for "Free Tibet" (whatever that means) now, it will come back to bite you: see al-Qaeda.

40!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, 40 downloads!?!

no neck

[Anonymous Coward]

FCUK TIBET (spelling_intentional)

Athletes refusing medals

[achurch]

Show me an athlete who refuses his medal to make a point and then I might think the olympics are any different from the soccer world championship.

You mean like this guy?

You ask the wrong questions

[burnitdown]

Show me anti-Bush bloggers or songwriters disappearing off the streets of NY or Chicago or LA, and I'll agree America's problems deserve more attention than China's.

When you ask the wrong questions, you get the wrong answers.

I say America is decaying. You say America is not arresting bloggers, THEREFORE we are doing just fine. You are equating the path to decay to the path of arresting bloggers. Since there is more to the issue than that, I think you are asking the wrong question as a way of (personally) avoiding the issue.

Your government and media tell you that you have freedom because anti-Bush bloggers (an inconsequential cabal of people who make under $40,000 a year and so feel disenfranchised in a political system where media influences equals votes) are still walking the streets. It would be convenient for them if decay could be so measured in laws...

Nations decay as their citizens lose consensus on values. A nation is not its institutions, its laws or its leaders. A nation is its people. Nations are organic things. They can be born, age, and die. Ours is now dying (see Plato for confirmation) and you're worried about

Voters love one-click solutions

[burnitdown]

Of course, they think free speech and democracy are silver bullets, and prescribe heavy doses of them, because they work instantly when you install a shrink wrapped version onto any country. The only thing holding it back is the evil, EVIL dictator whose greatest pleasure is to oppress people. Once you take down that EVIL dictator everything works PERFECTLY.

That's the best summary so far.

I even think it's a mistake to see system of government as the enemy. When China was a starving mostly third-world nation, its Communist government did OK by the whole of the nation in getting it out of that state, even if some people were oppressed or died.

On internet sites, we drown in people who like one-click solutions. Just install Democracy, problem solved! These one-click voters fear any more complex solutions because (a) they're not sure they can understand them and (b) they're afraid that a complex solution will make them less "free," which really means un-accountable for maintaining the society around them.

As an old Star Trek opined, The needs of the many are greater than the needs of the one.

Nations are like living things. People are like their cells. We can whine about being cells, or we can face reality and grow up a bit, which is the one thing one-click voters don't like to do.

Wrong time scale

[burnitdown]

Politically free, free market societies simply tend to do better in the long run than repressive, totalitarian societies.

How many of these "politically free, free market societies" have existed for more than 200 years?

You realize 200 years is the time it takes history to sneeze while contemplating the fate of nations?

The Chinese may be right: until this whole "liberal democracy" agenda shows it can make a stable civilization for half a millennium, it's not worth trading a five millennium society for!

What, you mean the free market didn't end slavery?

[burnitdown]

Interestingly, no one seems to know much about how the slave trade was ended, in large part due to the efforts of Britain after we decided to abolish it.

Preposterous.

The invisible hand ushered slavery off the face of this earth, just as the great Libertarian God had predicted aeons ago.

Oh wait, that opinion is decidedly unpopular, so it'll get modded down and no one will see it, and even if they did, their heads are so full of TV they might not even be ready to accept it, so this was probably a waste of time. KTHXBYE

Most people = never wrong

[burnitdown]

most civilized people have come to accept.

Not speaking on this particular issue, but with your method.

As a scientist, what makes you think that the broadest sample represents the most accurate one, when we're talking about questions of analytical ability?

Most people want Britney Spears.
Most people want TV and donuts.
Most people hide their heads in the sand.

I don't think "most people" ever come up with the right answer to anything.

Mexico

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't Tibet sign documents giving China the right to govern them?

Also, I am curious about something:

What if Mexicans had decided they wanted Texas back? Would the US "Free Texas?"

When are they officially launching iPhone in China

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wondering if anyone has the latest scoop on the China Mobile developments with Apple. Do you guys think it will take off?