Slashdot Mirror


Vietnam Imposes New Blogging Restrictions

GMAW is one of many to mention that the Vietnam government has approved a new set of regulations aimed at bloggers. The new restrictions ban bloggers from discussing certain subjects that the government deems sensitive or inappropriate. Not only are the topics limited, but bloggers are being directed to only write about issues that directly impact their personal lives. "The rules, which were approved Dec. 18, attempt to rein in Vietnam's booming blogosphere. It has become an alternative source of news for many in the communist country, where the media is state-controlled. The new rules require Internet companies that provide blogging platforms to report to the government every six months and provide information about bloggers on request."

13 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. So I guess no... by ethicalBob · · Score: 5, Funny

    So I guess no "me blog you long time"??

    --
    Politics will sooner or later make fools of everybody... - Dick Armey
  2. Re:Necessity by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 4, Funny

    So what you're saying is that in Vietnam, it's possible to die in a Blogging accident?

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  3. Communist? by matt4077 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Vietnam is communism in name only (not even that since it calls itself socialist). Since 1986 Vietnam is, like China today, just yet-another undemocratic country. Communism is mostly an economic concept, and the Vietnamese economy has largely shifted to a free market system.

    1. Re:Communist? by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is absolutely true. They have a stock market and everything. They are very capitalist in that even the communist leaders are playing the markets, making investments, and trying to acquire as much wealth as they can. The free market is definitely in effect. The big difference is that there is little transparency and no real regulations to ensure that it is a fair market. So corruption is everywhere destroying the efficiency of the market. You are right: Is is capitalism without democracy.

  4. Re:Necessity by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nah, it's fascist bull just as we suspected. I lived in Vietnam for a year, married a Vietnamese woman, and spend at least two weeks there every year since. They have no legitimate need to censor the net other than to keep the current corrupt officials in power.

  5. Re:Necessity by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I dunno if that's true. Though the only time that comes to mind is in times of (actual) war. The citizens should not allowed to publish the locations and troop strengths of army regiments, for example; it may directly endanger those soldiers.

    --
    "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
  6. Re:Didn't they choose Communism? by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Some of them chose communism. A lot of them didn't. Having lived and worked over there (on a Linux related project even) I know good Vietnamese there who supported South Vietnam and the US. After the south fell they spent years in re-education camps. They had been to the US in the 60's and received training on computers and electronics. Now they don't own a single thing and are kept out of any good paying job by the communists who still seek to push the former South Vietnamese. They live in poverty even poor Americans cannot imagine. It is very sad what they are doing to their own country. But the poor brainwashed people of Vietnam still support communism.

    I'm not sure we can really fault the poor and uneducated who chose communism. They were starving and were just looking for a better way. They did not have access to world news or history classes from their villages and only knew what they received in the form of propaganda.

    But we can definitely fault the corrupt communist leadership for taking advantage of these poor people and making millions of them pay with their lives.

  7. Re:Necessity by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Funny

    Look at the parent here, is it really a troll or was a moderator simply abusing the system to push down my unpopular statements?

    No, it wasn't a troll. Unfortunately, due to the lack of a "-50,000 Gormless Cretin" moderation category, the "troll" rating often gets used as a substitute.

  8. What the Pho? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Informative

    The new restrictions ban bloggers from discussing certain subjects that the government deems sensitive or inappropriate. Not only are the topics limited, but bloggers are being directed to only write about issues that directly impact their personal lives.

    If I was a Vietnamese blogger, the new restrictions would directly impact my personal life.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  9. Re:Necessity by rohan972 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Communism like capitalism is an economic model and it has nothing to do with freedom of speech, religion or human rights.

    Communism as espoused by Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto required the use of public education as an instrument of social control, the destruction of the traditional family and the destruction of traditional religion.

    "There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc. that are common to all states of society. But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis"

    "The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention"

    "Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists."


    There is of course some context to these quotes, which you can check out for yourself - http://www.gutenberg.org/files/61/61.txt

    I don't think it is unreasonable to use the Communist Manifesto to answer the question "What is communism?". The answer most definitely has everything to do with freedom of speech, religion and human rights.

  10. Re:Necessity by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think what he's saying is that governments who drive subversive speech underground aren't really doing themselves, or their citizens, any favors. Ideas don't need sunlight to grow.

    Look at the US's case. We don't criminalize any speech, really, except kiddie porn and direct incitements to violence. (The McCain-Feingold campaign funding law is an arguable subject but there it's funding and timing, not content as such, that is involved.) So any nutcase with a chip on his shoulder can propagate the most outlandish, hateful tripe you could imagine. Things that would get him prosecuted in much of the EU, or executed in China.

    What happens as a result? Not a damn thing. The resulting cacophony of dissidence just raises the "noise floor" of popular discourse. No radical point of view gains any more traction than it would have if it were aggressively suppressed by the government; if anything, we've become a more conservative nation since the Internet gave the nutcases their soapbox.

    Suppressing speech is always pointless at best, and more likely counterproductive.

  11. Re:Necessity by Daimanta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because it does not fall into the standard /. creed.

    If you don't support the /. groupthink(which they say they hate but deeply love)(which is ironically doublethink) you will be downmodded as troll/flamebait/overrated. It seems that the overrated tag is made especially for this situation. Some people may disagree with a message that is not troll or flamebait so there needs to be a solution. That solution develops in the form of overrated. Overrated is nothing more than a cheap populous vote on the popularity of the opinion. Don't agree with a post? Mod it overrated/underrated to "correct" the score.

    Slashdotters claim to believe in absolute freedom of speech but if your opinion is unpopular it is hidden from sight. Well, that isnt a problem because everybody can still see it via the view levels, right? True, but it obscures the message and that is all /. needs, to make it harder to see views that do not conform to groupthink. It's like the great firewall of China, people with will can surpass it but it stops most people from seeing unwanted information and that's enough for them.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  12. Keep your newspeak to yourself. by rohan972 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think it is unreasonable to use the Communist Manifesto to answer the question "What is communism?".

    That is like using On the Origin of Species to answer questions about evolution. Of course quote mining Creationists like to do just that since it weakens the argument, which is I suspect why you use Marx rather than contemporary communist theorists.

    It's nothing like that at all. Communism is a political philosophy not a science. Evolutionary theory has changed in response to new evidence, as you would expect for any field of scientific endeavour. Coming up with a completely new and unrelated theory and calling it "evolution" would be fundamentally dishonest, as is coming up with new political theories and calling them "communism".

    Redefining words to stifle opposing arguments is exactly the kind of behaviour to expect from people intent on destroying freedom of speech and human rights. I'm shocked to hear it from a communist, shocked I say!

    Marx not a good enough source of information about communism? I doubt you'll manage to pull that one off very successfully. I suppose the rest of us have it all wrong and "communism" means "love"? Maybe I just need to be sent to a "re-education camp" to learn more about love. Sounds like fun, doesn't it?