20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

alphadogg writes with this snippet from Network World: "The Internet has brought new hope to reformists in China since the country crushed pro-democracy protests in the capital 20 years ago. But as dissidents have gone high-tech, the government in turn has worked to restrict free speech on the Internet, stifling threats to its rule that could grow online. China has stepped up monitoring of dissidents and Internet censorship ahead of June 4, when hundreds were killed in 1989 after Beijing sent soldiers to its central Tiananmen Square to disperse protestors. The authoritarian government wants to ensure that date and other sensitive anniversaries this year pass without public disturbances, observers say. In recent months, China has blocked YouTube and closed two blog hosting sites, bullog.cn and fatianxia.com, known for their liberal content."

Comments

It's still inconvenient?

[DittoBox]

It's still inconvenient for the Chinese government that this not be seen by the public? Although not easy to pull off, perhaps there should be some plans to bring this issue up world wide when it's not around the anniversary. Catch the Chinese authorities off-guard.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[rzekson]

I wonder how feasible it would be for the Internet crowd to "make" June 4 the unofficial day of the free speech, by means of posting some small banner or a short comment on thousands of websites on that day, to the extent that it would get media coverage, and then repeating it every year on the anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre. I guess one could do that one one's personal blog, I don't know about a personal page at a university or other such places since it would probably violate some regulations. Surely, someone who's a lawyer could advise... obviously, Chinese citizens wouldn't notice, but the rest of the world might, including those who came from China to study and may be oblivious of the fact that the rest of the world considers Chinese government's policies and actions morally questionable.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[MoonBuggy]

I share your surprise - considering all the backlash that the various Western pre-Olympic protests against China and/or their actions saw from regular Chinese people, I was beginning to get the impression that many of them are happy enough with the state of affairs to actively defend it, so they certainly wouldn't challenge it. In that context I wouldn't have thought that information like this was that much of a risk any more.

Obviously the protests may present a skewed perspective from both sides, but to me it looks like the government are sitting pretty solidly. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe they're just so used to suppressing speech that they either don't think to stop or don't want to risk it in view of the small amount of international praise they stand to gain.

I wonder what the people of China would choose, politically speaking, if the people were given the option?

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[Brian Gordon]

If you put it up over the entire internet, China will block the entire internet.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[Anonymous Coward]

[Shrug] It took many years before China admitted the great depths of mistakes made many decades ago, and yet the main guy responsible is still revered and there's still a lot of glossing over of the real effects (e.g., tens of millions of deaths). Denial of one's mistakes is naturally popular. Why wouldn't they continue the tradition? Maybe they'll be ready to face the reality of the massacre at Tiananmen Square in a few more decades.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[rzekson]

...but that won't prevent Chinese students living abroad from getting the point. I personally know a number of very smart Chinese Ph.D. students who honestly believe that everything the Chinese government does is right and has always been right because they have been told so back home, and political correctness in U.S. prevents people from going anywhere near such subjects at school or in the workplace.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[syzler]

I for full heartily support this idea. I've started by registering freespeechday.com. If anyone would like to help, please send me an email or drop at note on this forum.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[Stargoat]

Mod parent up as absolutely correct.

You don't know overseas Chinese until you've been blasted with the evils of the US media industry (substitute publishing, indymedia, ad nos.). I have been in the overseas community since I met the lady who became my wife a decade ago. Since then, every Chinese person I brought the subject up with was unaware that North Korea invaded South Korea. None knew how many Chinese died in the war. One out of many knew that China fought the UN in the Korean War. Overseas Chinese do not know that China invaded Tibet. Many were unaware that China fought a war with India. Most did know of the Sino-Vietnam War, but did not know China lost. Many were also aware that China fought a low intensity war against the USSR for a decade.

All educated Chinese I have met, who should through their "education" know better regarding their government and its actions, are deliberately ignorant of recent history.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[mattwarden]

All I could think of while reading your comment is the Jay Leno pieces where they ask similar questions of Americans on the street and get just as many blank stares.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[williamhb]

You don't know overseas Chinese until you've been blasted with the evils of the US media industry (substitute publishing, indymedia, ad nos.). I have been in the overseas community since I met the lady who became my wife a decade ago. Since then, every Chinese person I brought the subject up with was unaware that North Korea invaded South Korea. None knew how many Chinese died in the war. One out of many knew that China fought the UN in the Korean War. Overseas Chinese do not know that China invaded Tibet. Many were unaware that China fought a war with India. Most did know of the Sino-Vietnam War, but did not know China lost. Many were also aware that China fought a low intensity war against the USSR for a decade. All educated Chinese I have met, who should through their "education" know better regarding their government and its actions, are deliberately ignorant of recent history.

There is a dilemma that means educating the overseas students is never likely to be sufficient. If you tell an ex-pat how rotten you think their government is, they will probably defend it even if they would normally criticise it at home. A less sensitive example: there are very few Brits who are imperialist or who think non-democratic colonialism is a good thing; tell them how terrible you think the British Empire was, though, and they will defend it as being historically much more just and self-correcting than any of the other empires of the era. They don't really see it as you criticising a system, but see it as you belittling their people. So if you tell overseas Chinese students how bad the Chinese government is, depending on how you put it, they might not thank you for it. And they are unlikely to pass on your criticisms back home. Actually, for China it is worse than that: many Chinese students overseas are asked to monitor other Chinese students, to make sure they don't hang out with the wrong crowd, etc. So, even if a student is open to your criticism of his country, it can be personally a bit risky for him to hang out with groups that openly and vehemently criticise the government. The upshot is that it has to be handled sensitively, and it's unlikely we'll make much real progress until it is possible for Chinese people to criticise their government more openly at home, rather than abroad.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[rzekson]

See, the issue lies not in knowing that certain events have taken place, but in being able to reflect on them, question them, interpret and speak freely about them. Chinese government, through its aggressive propaganda, created the situation where everything is linked this way or another to national pride. Even from your response it is sort of evident that you are being defensive, as if the reflection on the past events were to insult or otherwise discredit the entire Chinese nation. And this is precisely the issue. Many intelligent Chinese I had met seem completely unable to separate discussion of history and infamous past events from the matter of national pride. One person I tried to speak to about Tibet denied it fiercely to the point she almost cried. This sort of reaction is hardly normal. Questioning the actions of the Chinese government and bringing up the infamous events in history is treated by some as a personal attack at a deep emotional level. Surely, many Americans are also like that; the difference is that those Americans choose to be like that despite the fact they live in a free society, whereas for people who were born in China this may not be a matter of choice. If you think anyone here is trying to blame or discredit the Chinese, you are deeply confused; everyone here is rather sympathetic with your fellow citizens. The question is whether the Chinese raised in the communist propaganda can handle the criticism of their own government without taking it at the personal level and getting all emotional and defensive.

Re:It's still inconvenient?

[thej1nx]

Regardless of what some hardcore Indian nationalists say, India lost the 1962 Sino-Indian War. This is not a secret in China.

See, this is where your propaganda cool aid shows up. *Despite* claiming that the chinese have an unbiased view of the events and other countries, the bias still shows up in your views.

As an Indian, I can confirm that we are actually *taught* in school and colleges that India lost the Sino-Indian War. There is no delusion there. We lost. China won. As such, not even a school child in India thinks that we did not lose in any way. The Indian schoolbooks say that we won(or drew) every single war with Pakistan. They clearly say that India lost the war with China.

*Your* bias is clear however, when you stated your belief that some "hardcore Indian nationalist" do not believe India lost. I have yet to come across an Indian who believes so, specially when we get taught otherwise in schools.

From our version of history, Tibet was a territory conquered sometimes by Indian kings and sometimes by the Chinese(Since a unified India did not actually exist pre-mughal period). Britishers snatched it from the Chinese empire several centuries ago, and China simply sat quietly since it didn't think it was capable of taking on the British naval forces etc. at that point. Once the British decided to leave India, China evaluated the weaker Indian army and decided to stake its centuries old claim again. The Indian army which is still weaker than China and even then in its nascent stage, lost against the Chinese forces.

The Chinese Invasion came unexpected when negotiations were going on, and China was actually extending friendly overtures to India. This situation was the result of the idiocy of Nehru to attempt an alliance with China and at the same time antagonize China by giving refuge to the Dalai Lama(Which was obviously seen by China as interference in its internal affairs). Nevertheless, in background of the negotiations and Zhou Enlai claiming that there was no dispute between India and China, the unexpected attacks are seen by India as a stab in the back and betrayal of trust. So strong was the belief that India and China were allies, that Indian air force, which could have possibly succeeded in repelling the Chinese, was told to stand down.

The Indian perception of the Indo-sino war is that Nehru was an idiot to attempt an alliance with China, and that no matter how justified the Chinese claim over Tibet was, China/Zhou Enlai should have not pretended to "be friends to India", if China intended to invade over the territorial dispute.

And in that light, *of course* the Indians see Chinese as double-dealing backstabbers, but kindly stop claiming that any Indian claims that India won the Indo-Sino war. Indians do hate/mistrust the chinese in general, but they don't have any delusions about losing the Indo-Sino war.

Klein's article on BigBrotherChina is excellent.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not as epic as her book Shock Doctrine but it is a must read for any tech with a conscience.

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/05/chinas-all-seeing-eye

http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine

And the secret sauce is...

[hey!]

secrecy.

It isn't ubiquitous surveillance that does the trick, it's ubiquitous potential surveillance. Likewise iron fisted rule is crude and inefficient. The true art is to rule without rules. China has high sounding and extremely vague legal principles. Put the two together and you are never (a) sure if you are not being watched nor (b) if what you are doing is legal.

When you've achieved this, you don't need Big Brother. Every citizen is his own Big Brother.

You almost have to admire this system. It is tyranny, perfected.

Re:And the secret sauce is...

[hey!]

they live in a state of ignorance because of the governments cultural sandbox.

This statement is half right. The lessons of twentieth century totalitarianism is that what you call a "cultural sandbox" doesn't work. If so, a little perestoika wouldn't have been enough to cause the Soviet Union to fly apart. The truth was that the pablum of the state had never been internalized by the citizens. A thinking totalitarian would learn from this failure. You can't assume that because they're values are different from ours that they are too stupid to learn.

There are plenty of Chinese people who travel overseas for business or deal with foreigners. Each one of these is a potential vector for what the authorities would consider malignant ideas. I don't deny that the state acts like things like the Great Firewall are politically important. Perhaps they have their uses, but I actually think they may be as symptomatic as they are cause.

It's not enough to create a vacuum of information in peoples' heads. You have to put something there.

Re:Like this not happens in America

[JoshuaZ]

The scale of censorship is much smaller. The US has minor problems with censorship. The US has not, for example, blocked major news sites. Nor has it blocked Wikipedia and made its own version that the government likes. The comparison is simply not accurate.

Internet censorship is becoming more severe in much of the Western world. Great Britain and Australia are both engaging in serious, active censorship. However, even then the level is tiny compared to that of China.

Re:Like this not happens in America

[justinlee37]

Nobody here gets tortured in secret prisons for criticizing the government or practicing the wrong religion.

China is the product of Chinese culture.

[reporter]

The suppression of human rights (including the free expression of thought via the Internet) is due entirely to Chinese culture. No foreign power is imposing the current brutal form of government on China. This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it. If the minority, who oppose the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), attempted the overthrow the government, then the rest of Chinese society will kill the minority.

When the overwhelming majority of people in a nation truly want democracy and human rights, the nation quickly and peacefully transforms into a liberal Western democracy. Case in point is Eastern Europe. Once the Kremlin ceased suppressing Eastern Europe, the Eastern Europeans peacefully and quickly transformed into liberal Western democracies. Except for Romania (where the dictator was killed), there was no bloodshed. There was no violence.

In the late 1980s, what was the strength of desire for creating Western democracies in Eastern Europe? Consider Czechoslovakia. In one day of 1989 November, about 800,000 people gathered in Prague and rallied for the creation of a Western democracy. 800,000 people is about 5% of the population.

By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy. 1 million people is only 0.1 % of the Chinese population.

In other words, in the late 1980s, the strength of support for democracy in Eastern Europe was 50 times the strength in China.

I admire the Eastern Europeans.

China is what it is due to how the Chinese people act and think. No foreign power is imposing the CCP on China. The Chinese people support the CCP.

Re:China is the product of Chinese culture.

[Anonymous Coward]

'The Chinese people support the CCP'

It is not so straightforward as this. There is plenty of discontent. Corrupt officials and police are hated. The CCP do a good job of getting the glory of the Chinese people's fervent nationalistic feeling. Control of the media makes this not too difficult a task.

'This government has existed for decades because a majority of Chinese support it'
Not really - it has existed by control, through force, fear and a growing economy. There is no way of testing how many people actually support the government.

'By contrast, in one day of 1989 June, about 1 million people gathered in Tiananmen Square to demand the creation of a Western democracy'

Wrong on a number of details. The gathering happened throughout the preceding 6 weeks, at least. Many, many more gathered in major cities throughout China at the same time. (I witnessed demonstrations in May 1989 in Beijing,Shanghai,Wuhan,Chongqing, Chengdu).
There was no 'demand for the creation of a Western democracy' (ok - individuals might have said this, but no definite concept demanded). The people were fed up with the system, lack of opportunity, corruption - it was an outpouring of many grievances.

However, I suppose your point is that, if the people were fed up then they could have/should have overthrown the government. The fact they didn't is more to do with the fact that China is a big place, with a mix of cultures,languages, poor communication (especially in 1989), with no environment for establishing a concerted opposition. You cannot infer that, because the people did not overthrow the government, the people support it.

(signed: a long term foreign resident of China)

Fat and Happy

[timeOday]

An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth. It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat. I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat, but it certainly didn't roll them back 20 years. (Not that this is specific to China; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham, it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency.) One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead. The next time China's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period, then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.

Re:Fat and Happy

[williamhb]

An explosion of discontent is unlikely in China because the 20 years since Tiananmen have been dominated by incredible economic growth. It is hard to complain when your walette is getting fat. I realize the global economic downturn hit China somewhat, but it certainly didn't roll them back 20 years. (Not that this is specific to China; Americans never minded the Iraq war enough to do anything about it, even after they learned it was a sham, it was high gas prices and finally the economic collapse that made people revile the Bush presidency.) One implication of this is that the notion of political liberalization as a necessary byproduct of capitalism is not yet dead. The next time China's growth slows or reverses for a sustained period, then we will see if its new middle class has power to go with their wealth.

Unfortunately, I think you are wrong and that the West basically missed its opportunity to promote reform in China 30 years ago or more. One of the most effective ways of promoting liberalisation in formerly restrictive regimes has been the EU -- a large trigger for the democratisation of Eastern Europe was access to the EU free market, and pots of money. Not to belittle the Cold War, but a big factor in the Berlin Wall falling was poor East Germans knowing the West Germans were doing it much better and that the only way to join in the wealth was to liberalise. Since then, eastern European countries have been falling over backwards to reform themselves and get themselves on that EU gravy train. Hardly surprising -- the same trick worked just as efficiently way back in the 70s with Spain. With China, meanwhile, we've effectively let them join in the riches without any hint of reform -- the EU and US has happily outsourced all its production to China without much regard to reform or political, religious, or personal freedom. We no longer have a juicy economic carrot to wave in front of them, because we've long since given it to them. They can't get "better access to our markets" because they've pretty much already got complete access to our markets.

Re:Like this not happens in America

[DigiShaman]

That will change.

There are many in America (and an astounding amount on Slashdot) who would love to have religion banned forever. I would go so far as to say they would advocate any and all means stamp it out. Granted, these are the same group of people whom would close down gitmo and release the prisoners because we shouldn't have gone to war in the first place. Oh the irony...

For the few open minded people left on Slashdot, I would recommend reading a book titled "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark R. Levin. Quite an eye-opener.

Re:Some surprising results searching google.cn

[goldaryn]

> Is google.cn only censored when it detects IP addresses within China?

Yes. Do not use a Chinese proxy, even if you are curious. You could get someone killed or thrown in jail.

If you are really curious, try putting some banned keywords into some Chinese websites from your own internet connection.

Many Chinese web searches are accessible from $your_country.

Re:Like this not happens in America

[jcr]

China are only torturing their own citizens

The Tibetans aren't Chinese citizens, they're people living under a foreign occupation.

-jcr