Slashdot Mirror


China Says US Uses Facebook To Spread Political Unrest

crimeandpunishment writes "A Chinese government-backed think tank says the US and other western governments use Facebook and other social networking sites to spread political unrest. Their report says, 'We must pay attention to the potential risks and threats to state security as the popularity of social-networking sites continues to grow,' and calls for increased scrutiny of the sites."

50 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. Oh really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    They clearly overestimate the deterministic nature of the average social network user.

    1. Re:Oh really? by Narcocide · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Clearly they have yet to realize that political unrest spreads itself. Facebook just makes it faster.

    2. Re:Oh really? by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I might have put it in different terms, but yeah, that's about the size of it.

      As I grow into an "older perspective" on life, I begin to see that much trouble occurs when people try too hard to block "the human condition." We are all people and we think and feel as people do. It doesn't matter what spot of dirt you were born on or even what culture(s) you were born into so much. In varying degrees, we all pretty much want the same things and will act in many of the same ways to get them. (with a wide variety of personal limitations) And certainly one thing all people have in common is that we want to express ourselves and I'm not even sure that's exclusive to humans as I am sure pet lovers might agree.

      The purpose of government is to serve society in a way that keeps it from destroying itself. I recognize what raw human desire, greed and ambition can drive people to do -- anything. That drive needs to be regulated for a healthy society to flourish. But without that raw human desire, there can be no healthy society and certainly no healthy individuals as our hopes and dreams are not so far removed from desire, greed and ambition. There are unquestionably good reasons why we have laws against murder and against theft. We need them to keep us from destroying one another. But going too far in the direction if controlling, limiting and containing the human spirit, which is what governments like China seek to do, and you will find people literally willing to die for the chance to express their thoughts and ideas.

      In the U.S., our constitution (or what's left of it) was written specifically, to prevent government from serving itself instead of society. It has managed to slow the progress of greedy and ambitious people who seek to limit people in order to enrich themselves. The rights to free speech and to bear arms weren't written on a whim and were all about limiting what the government can do, because without limitations, government (which is a smaller group of people who regulate larger groups of people) will do what humans will do without regulation imposed upon them which includes killing and stealing and other things.

      For China's government to assert that Facebook causes political unrest is nothing short of China's denial of what it means to be human. Every time I see censorship, I see one mind wishing to silence another mind. It just can't work that way... and it doesn't.

    3. Re:Oh really? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To be fair, they were twits beforehand, who thought that signing petitions they would forget about 15 minutes later was fighting for some cause.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    4. Re:Oh really? by Mikkeles · · Score: 2, Interesting

      'The purpose of government is to serve society in a way that keeps it from destroying itself.'

      I would rephrase that as: The purpose of government is to serve people in a way that keeps them from destroying each other; in that any social institutions should be present for the benefit of people.
      Otherwise, it's just replacement of government with society as the raison d'etre for tyranny.

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
  2. The Americans are tampering with our internet! by ChrisK87 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...says the government that pays citizens by the post to write pro-government comments on Chinese blogs.

    1. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by the_womble · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In Asia "western governments" are used to justify bad legislation and censorship in the same way that terrorists and pedoophiles are used to justify the same in the west. There are so many handles you can use to push the sheeple where you want them to be.

    2. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Riots are great, China got a free Rockex cypher machine when "protesters" toured the British embassy in 1967 Peking.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Americans use Facebook to spread political unrest, do they?

      Sure... Teabaggers and Dittoheads.

      By Chinese standards, Rush Limbaugh is no less of a problem than some CIA backed troll. Just being free to speak your mind constitutes "spreading political unrest".

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by TheEyes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It wouldn't take all that many people to astroturf the most popular sites; maybe a few hundred, which wouldn't be that expensive at China's current wages.

      The irony here is that Chinese wages are increasing, due to the chinese one child policy and their aging population; eventually it'll become far more expensive to play this sort of censorship game.

    5. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Like there aren't restive jackasses on the left.

      Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher the anti-vaxer or my favorites...MEChA

    6. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by baboo_jackal · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure - there are plenty of political agitators in the US, all over the political spectrum. The funniest thing with respect to this article is that whatever agitation the Chinese are complaining about is probably laughable compared to the scrutiny and venom to which *our* elected government is subjected from Rush, Beck, HuffPo, Daily Kos, Air America, etc. Seriously, who would *want* to be president of this angry-ass country?

      (That said, I respectfully note both parent and GP 4-digit IDs and defer to your old-timey judgement) :)

    7. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by peragrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually who would want to be our president? you have to be a moron to even consider it. For any given situation you have one of three tools, diplomacy, lawyers, or soldiers. if you can't fix it with those three tools then your screwwed. Every one who goes to live in the white house comes out pale withdrawn, and much grayer than when they went in. The president of teh USA get's all the blame but rarely can do anything about it.

      As an example BP's oil spill. BP is a company so diplomacy won't work. he can sue them or send in the army. The army doesn't have any experience in shutting down underwater oil wells so that won't work and suing them would take 5 years anyways. Therefore Obama can only let BP work add a little pressure but in reality is helpless. Yet he gets all the blame for failure.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    8. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by vivian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The other difference is in the US, workers are sold the dream that anyone has an equal chance to make it big if they work hard enough at it, and workers are free to complain long and loud about the system , their bosses, how much the government sucks, etc.

      In China, they had a revolution that was supposed to make everyone equal, but the workers are still getting screwed over and getting bugger all for their efforts, without any accompanying freedoms that US workers enjoy.

      Of course in both systems, the workers are getting screwed, and will probably always get screwed, because those in charge of the means of production, (ie. factory owners, Intellectual property owners, land owners etc.) will always find a way to justify why their time and effort is worth so much more per hour than the ordinary employees.

      For example, do you think that the average CEO of a company really does such a magnificent job compared to the average employee, that they should be paid 531 times the average hourly worker? http://management.about.com/cs/generalmanagement/a/CEOsOverpaid.htm

      There is definitely a case for CEOs getting paid more than a regular worker, (say, 10x), as they do have a great deal more responsibility and a rarer set of skills compared to the average worker, but that level of difference is a sign of a broken and unfair system, just as it is in China.

    9. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by Atryn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The only difference between Chinese and Americans is that Americans think they're free. Just because we have nice TVs doesn't mean we have it so much better than the average Chinese.

      Average American Income: $43,762 (US Census Bureau)
      Average Chinese Income: $2,025 (WorldBank)

      Average US Life Expectancy: 75 / 80 (m / f) (WHO)
      Average Chinese Life Expectancy: 72 / 75 (m / f) (WHO)

      Probability of dying under 5 yrs old, US: 8 per 1000 (WHO)
      Probability of dying under 5 yrs old, China: 24 per 1000 (WHO)

      GNI per capita, US: $47,240 (World Bank)
      GNI per capita, China: $3,620 (World Bank)

      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
    10. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by kz45 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "The only difference between Chinese and Americans is that Americans think they're free. Just because we have nice TVs doesn't mean we have it so much better than the average Chinese."

      It has nothing to do with "nice TVs". We are allowed to speak out against the government without getting thrown in jail. There is more than one political party (every US citizen has a chance to vote) and we can run businesses without having to pay off the corrupt government. There is no such thing as a license to have a certain amount of kids in the US.

    11. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue! --Barry Goldwater

      Of course, if you see the demands of justice and liberty as opposing forces, you might still claim that Goldwater is seeking the moderate position between absolute justice and absolute liberty. But that would involve a certain amount of debasement.

    12. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by kz45 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The other difference is in the US, workers are sold the dream that anyone has an equal chance to make it big if they work hard enough at it, and workers are free to complain long and loud about the system , their bosses, how much the government sucks, etc."

      You do have an equal chance. Hard work has to do with it, but it also takes a little bit of luck and a good idea (something that's actually worth money).

      "In China, they had a revolution that was supposed to make everyone equal"

      Does a society really want everyone to be equal? Everyone should have an equal chance, but human nature dictates that some people will put more effort into life than others

      "For example, do you think that the average CEO of a company really does such a magnificent job compared to the average employee, that they should be paid 531 times the average hourly worker?"

      Why does it matter? Private companies can pay their employees whatever they want to. If they want to pay the CEO $10 million dollars and the regular employees $10/hour, there should be no problems.

      "There is definitely a case for CEOs getting paid more than a regular worker, (say, 10x), as they do have a great deal more responsibility and a rarer set of skills compared to the average worker, but that level of difference is a sign of a broken and unfair system, just as it is in China."

      I love how you just throw a number out there and think that's it's "fair".

    13. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

      --Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

      If someone is suffering from severe physical pain, the best medical solution is to diagnose and treat the underlying pain, and not simply to give them a narcotic. On the other hand, if you cannot treat the underlying condition, it would be inhumane to cut off opiates.

    14. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by vivian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      no, I do not think that society wants to make everyone equal - which is why the idealized version of communism will always fail - everyone is most certainly not equal, and people who put in the effort to better themselves and are more productive should be better rewarded for their efforts.

      I think the real problem is rampant crony-ism in both China and in Western countries, where there is a huge disparity between the pay for top level jobs versus average jobs.

      The 10x figure was not completely out of my ass, by the way. The average worker salary in the US is about $50,000, and in the 80's the salary used to be 42x the average working salary. President Obama has set the salary cap at 500,000 for any of the companies that the government bailed out (ie. 10x), and that seems like a reasonable starting point to me.

      You can only live in one house, cruise around in one boat and drive one car at a time. At a certain point, bigger and bigger salaries for top CEO's stop increasing the real quality of life of an executive and instead just becomes a way of keeping track of how much better than the next CEO they are - ie. the marginal utility of every extra dollar a CEO earns approaches zero, but it is in our nature to always want more, so the salaries grow way beyond the point at which further increases are meaningless.

      The same amount of money however, makes a much bigger difference to employees at the bottom end of the pay scale, and would overall improve the standard of the average employee much more, and generally make for happier employees.

      I am not saying everyone should get paid identically - of course individual talents and skills have to be recognized and rewarded. I am just questioning the huge disparity between the top levels and the bottom levels, which are by and large maid at the expense of the guys on the bottom rung.

    15. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by hedwards · · Score: 2

      7%? It's more like 70% of the US national debt. They can't afford to take it with them any more than we can afford to let them. It would be financial MAD.

    16. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by vivian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are 170,000 prisoners in California.
      it costs $47,102 per prisoner to keep them in jail. http://www.lao.ca.gov/laoapp/laomenus/sections/crim_justice/6_cj_inmatecost.aspx?catid=3
      Total cost: $8 billion

      California Budget deficit: $19 Billion

      so no, just halving the number of prisoners alone would not solve the budget crisis - but some percentage of them would be paying taxes, and generally participating in the economy of the state which would further increase revenues, instead of each of them being a $47,000 a year money pit.

      Additionally, the guards etc. that are needed to guard them would be engaged in some other part of the economy which would also increase growth.
      Having a guard watching over a prisoner is the economic equivalent of having the state employ people to dig holes and fill them in again - it keeps people busy but does not help with the growth of the economy. If the prisoners really need to be in jail then it's worth while, but if they are there because of laws that tend to be "jail happy" ( like trigger happy) then it is a waste of resources to keep them there and a waste of their potential contribution to society. Leep jail for the really bad crooks - not the idiots that decided to smoke the wrong substance - those guys need education/rehabilitation, not jail.

    17. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by Cwix · · Score: 2, Interesting

      See if we judged politicians on them misspeaking it goes both ways.. How about you blame Obama for something hes done.. not something hes said. Cause if we are going to judge politicians on stupid shit they say, Bush, Cheney, Palin, and McCain are all gonna be on the top of the list. (albeit Biden, and other democrats will be up there too lol) Im just saying its a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

      Things McCain said:

      "I think she's most qualified of any that has run recently for vice president, tell you the truth." --on Sarah Palin, interview with Don Imus, Oct. 22, 2008

      "[Sarah Palin] knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America. ... And, uh, she also happens to represent, be governor of a state that's right next to Russia." --after being asked about Sarah Palin's foreign policy experience, interview with WCSH-6, Portland, OR, Sept. 12, 2008

      "I have had a strong and a long relationship on national security, I've been involved in every national crisis that this nation has faced since Beirut, I understand the issues, I understand and appreciate the enormity of the challenge we face from radical Islamic extremism. I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time." --explaining at an Oct. 2007 debate why Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are not qualified to be president

      "I think if you're just talking about income, how about $5 million?" --after being asked by Rev. Rick Warren to define "rich," Lake Forest, California, Aug. 16, 2008

      "Well, basically, it's a Google." --on how he's conducting his VP search, Richmond, Virginia, June 9, 2008

      "We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies." --Kenner, Louisiana, June 3, 2008

      "Make it a hundred...That would be fine with me." -to a questioner who asked if he supported President Bush's vision for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq for 50 years

      "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated."

      "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should. I've got Greenspan's book."

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    18. Re:The Americans are tampering with our internet! by Ash+Vince · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, just China and North Korea and Thailand and Pakistan and...

      Yet there is also South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, India, Israel, Kuwait and loads of other places.

      It is the worlds largest continent so of course it contains some dubious countries. It would be like saying the Americas (North, South, and Central) are full of dictatorships based on the few in central America and ignoring all the rest. Making accurate generalisations about the policatal make up of an entire continent is just not possible unless you are limiting them to saying they have humans living there and not talking about antarctica.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  3. True but not necessarily a bad thing by dbIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most stable governments can survive a bit of political unrest and it's good for society in general.

    1. Re:True but not necessarily a bad thing by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's worth mentioning that the Chinese have had the worst social unrest since perhaps the French revolution. The cultural revolution was a populist movement, pushed along by one man who had been sidelined in the government. Lots of people died, lots of great things were destroyed. Given that, it is kind of understandable that the Chinese are wary of avoiding popular unrest.

      Another point that needs to be taken into consideration is that the Chinese power structure is not all based in the national government. Just as in the US there is a constant struggle between state power and federal power, in China there is a struggle between the national government and regional governments. One method the national government has as a power lever is manipulation of the people; they are capable of fomenting unrest when they want to foment it (as during the Correfour riots. Some have speculated that the riots were aimed not at the French, but at the city governments to remind them who is in control).

      --
      Qxe4
    2. Re:True but not necessarily a bad thing by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually it's not so much about local v federal. That's mostly to do with corruption, and not wanting to give up proffi...err control. They honestly could give two flips about autonomy unless you live in HK. The real issue that seems brewing to me is Western China military v Eastern China Government. What most know is the somewhat safe Eastern China where we get most of our shiny crap from. The Western China however seems to have more in common still with fudle lords of days long gone by. Just no one really talks about it much. The quality of life in that area is markedly lower (what middle class?), technology of course hasn't made much impact there, and if your foreign, your pretty insane to even think of going near the Western areas.

      I'm still wondering how that is going to play out especially with the coming water shortages China is getting itself into.

  4. The obvious solution by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The obvious solution is to use social networks to their advantage, to manipulate the people.

    Seriously though, they do have something of a point, the US WOULD push social networking in China if they thought it would help bring freedom of speech to China. It's not the US government pushing social unrest, it's the people themselves communicating and finding out the problems with the government. I don't think the US government pushing anything would help anything though, and might even hurt in this case. Better to let the Chinese people find their own way, as long as they don't go insane.

    --
    Qxe4
    1. Re:The obvious solution by The+Wooden+Badger · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't care what they do with facebook. I just want them to friend me and join my mafia.

      --
      Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.
    2. Re:The obvious solution by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anyone who don't believe this just need to look at examples as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the various democratically elected governments in South America (and around the world) overthrown by the US in the past century to see how US foreign policy works.

      Just to point out something blindingly obvious......that should be blindingly obvious to you......US foreign policy has changed a lot in the last century. It has changed a lot in the last 25 years, and it's making dramatic changes right now as we try to find our place in the post cold-war world (note the switch Bush made between isolationism to invading countries). The entire world has changed! A hundred years ago, European countries couldn't wait to jump at each other's throats.

      You are incredibly naive to lump an entire century together and say, "That is US policy."

      Incidentally, if the 'ruling class' is controlling foreign policy, it is the fault of the citizens for allowing them to do that.

      --
      Qxe4
    3. Re:The obvious solution by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 2

      Er, if you can join (and leave) a class as easily as all that, it wasn't much of a class, was it?

  5. Your Farms Belong to Us by retech · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No doubt the FBI, CIA and DHS log far more hours in Farmville than just regular folk. It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

    1. Re:Your Farms Belong to Us by cosm · · Score: 2, Funny

      No doubt the FBI, CIA and DHS log far more hours in Farmville than just regular folk. It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

      I would say citation needed, but the current state of affairs speaks for itself.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
  6. Radio by michaelmalak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What if the U.S. were to set up a radio station across the border from a nation, and began broadcasting propaganda into said nation?

    The Slashdot community frequently criticizes the media for making arbitrary distinctions between the Internet and non-Internet realms -- time for some self-criticism.

    1. Re:Radio by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oh, I have no doubt that, if they thought they had a shot at it, the feds would be shoving propaganda down every last tube in the series, social networks included.

      I'm just deeply unconvinced that something like Facebook, or any Facebook-esque clone, is a particularly effective medium for the US to spread political unrest in China(now, I can see a much stronger case for the US encouraging the spread of Facebook, ideally the real thing just so that we can make a buck on the side, or Facebook-esque sites within China, on the theory that they will magnify the effects of existing Chinese governmental problems).

      Something like Voice of America, whether it is effective or not, is relatively easy for the government to set up. Some radio hardware in the nearest friendly or at least not hostile location, just enough native language speakers to translate the programs, and a friendly news desk to churn out the message. Getting the same effect from a social networking site is harder. Or, rather, getting a precise analog of that effect is pretty easy: just set up a VOA fan page/RSS feed/twitter whatever that people can choose to follow(and the state can probably block, in many cases). Using the social network more subtly and effectively is hard. Even the most sympathetic Chinese are going to be pissed if they are getting machine-generated spam from CIA fronts; because everyone hates machine generated spam. And it isn't bloody likely that we have anywhere near enough analysts who speak reasonably idiomatic Chinese and don't have better things to do to actually infiltrate social networks on a personal level and do message shaping.

      Here is my guess: China, despite the authoritarian pretensions of its central government, has a great deal of trouble with corruption and mismanagement at the local level. When you combine that with a somewhat wild-west quasi-capitalist expansion, you get a recipe for a nearly constant stream of stories of abuses that would get all but the most dogmatically statist Chinese citizens upset. People's land basically being stolen by thugs with the connivance of local officials, blatantly illegal pollution poisoning people, fake baby formula with no actual nutritional content killing a few hundred babies by slow starvation, that sort of thing. The state doesn't generally approve of this sort of thing, often executing the perps; but it also generally does not approve of any spread of broader popular discontent about it. Some local anger is unavoidable; but censorship is frequently employed to slow the broader spread of the message until damage control and spin can be done. These are the sorts of situations where social networking tools could really make that task more difficult. Everybody is linked to their school buddies from back home, and their college buddies from wherever, and their work people from where they are now. Some nasty provincial scandal occurs back home, your highschool friend who stayed local tells you about it, you get upset and tell your college and work friends...

      If that is the sense in which China believes that the US is "using Facebook to spread political unrest", they may well be right. I'm sure the Feds aren't exactly crying bitter tears over that effect, and they may even be taking more direct actions in its favor(overt and covert cooperation between strategic corporations and nation states is neither new nor exclusive to the US...). If, on the other hand, they are suggesting that facebook is full of CIA agents pretending to be popular schoolgirls or something, they are either lying or dreaming. The CIA might wish that that were so; but there just is no way that they have enough Chinese-speaking agents to have any real effect on Chinese areas of facebook, and everybody hates spam, so simply bombarding Chinese users with machine messages would be counterproductive.

  7. Why not just outbid the US Gov in a tapping bid? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why not just outbid the US Gov in a tapping bid? What could the market value be? Stasi and KGB would have needed a saliva bucket next to the bed for this.

  8. Sounds like paranoia and projection to me... by divisionbyzero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given that the Chinese government pays people to do the very same thing on every Western media/blog site they come across. I seriously doubt the American government does the same. There is no need. Apparently the Chinese government can't tell the difference between real enthusiasm (even if implicit) for one's country and the enforced/coerced kind to which they are accustomed.

  9. Really ? How ? by pawzlion · · Score: 2, Funny

    What are they doing, not "liking" China's status updates ? Perhaps people are joining groups titled "If a million people join this group, we will overthrow Hu Jintao" Gee China, paranoid much ?

    1. Re:Really ? How ? by macshit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are plenty of FB groups/fan-pages like "free tibet", pro falun-gong, etc (and stuff like "free the monks in burma" which is not directly related to China, but which nonetheless likely makes the chinese government nervous), and those may be what they're whining about.

      It's very unclear whether such groups make any actual difference in practice, even if they have many members, but they do help to keep such issues an active subject of popular discussion, and of course the chinese government royally freaks out at even a mention of many of these topics (I don't know why they do, exactly, other than an institutional proclivity to freak out at even the slightest loss of control over information).

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
  10. Governments oppose Free Speech by kainosnous · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No government really welcomes free speech. Some may claim that they do, but actions speak louder than words. The only interest that a government has in free communication is when they have a firm grip over it's contents. It just happens that the US and other western governments have measures already in place to control or obfuscate the information on the web and in the media.

    They create tools such as the Fairness Doctrine, and generally flood the people with "different viewpoints" to muddy the waters. China's issue is that it has spent so much time trying to shut down the internet that it really hasn't been able to get the control that it would like. That's where this campaign comes in. It's the Chinese who are now muddying the waters. They come up with some reports that claim that the west is actively trying to hurt them. Then, when people see something online, the Chinese government can say "It's all lies made up by west. Trust us instead."

    In time, and with the rise of contentless Flash pages and product ads, the web will probably stop being useful for information to any but the hardcore nerd with time and tools to push past the fluff. Where are all the RDF search engines that we were promised? With HTML5 I hear people talking a lot about video playback functionality, but I haven't heard any buzz about the semantic web. A web that gives you only pretty pictures won't help the world, and likewise won't hurt a government.

    --
    There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40
  11. Take THIS, China by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's it. I am unfriending China.

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  12. Free speech: The US's most powerful weapon by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This goes to something I've been saying for years now. The U.S. has some pretty impressive military power, but that's not what scares the world's dictators, religious zealots, and oppressive regimes. What do they fear about us? Rock 'n' roll, short skirts, blue jeans, and *especially* cell phones, e-mail, and Facebook.

    The U.S. does a lot of things poorly, including, lately, waging ground wars. But one thing we're still very very good at: coming up with new ways for the world's young people to mock and ridicule authority figures, and for adults to talk to each other freely without government interference.

    The cell phone, the 18" satellite dish, and the Internet are the most terrifying weapons against autocratic states the world has ever known. Is Facebook a threat to oppressive regimes? HELL YES, and we should be proud of that.

    U.S. foreign policy should recognize this fact, and use it to its advantage. Rather than planning air strikes against Iranian and North Korean nuclear sites, we should be flying over and dropping cell phones, laptops, and MP3 players loaded with Rage Against the Machine and Ani diFranco.

    1. Re:Free speech: The US's most powerful weapon by andre1s · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hmm reminds me of an old soviet joke the gist of which was A person from US trying to convince someone from USSR that there is no freedom of speech in USSR -In US a person can call a president an "idiot" with no repercussions -It same here replies the dude from USSR anyone can call US president an "idiot" with no repercussions

  13. Farmville! by countertrolling · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somebody planted the seeds of unrest...

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  14. Let a thousand flowers bloom? by identity0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if the Chinese gov't (or other regimes) have thought of just using Facebook to track down the networks of friends and acquaintences of dissidents, instead of banning it.

    During the Cultural Revolution, they said "Let a thousand flowers bloom", meaning they let dissident and anti-regime opinions flow unrestricted, suddenly free of censorship. But instead of listening to those ideas and implementing them, after a short period of freedom they cracked down and jailed those who had raised 'bad' opinions after they had revealed themselves. The promise of free speech had been a trap. I wonder if the same sort of thing could happen with online social media?

    People in the west talk about privacy violations of Facebook, but imagine if a bad gov't got its hands on all that data and data mined it...

  15. In fact, the US Mk II - with a difference by Kupfernigk · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Where have I encountered a landmass with an advanced society in the East and increasingly wild and ill-governed territory to the West in which native peoples were wiped out and had their culture destroyed? Oh yes.

    Now to make a serious point. One of the biggest problems of the US today stems from that time in the 19th and early 20th centuries. It's backward religions. Pioneers equipped with nothing but the Bible and no educated teachers went on to invent ridiculous religions - such as Mormonism and the wilder extremes of Southern Baptists - that continue to hold the US back socially and culturally today. (The same thing happened in South Africa, where the Dutch Reformed Church arose from semi-literate Boerdom.) The backward religions, just like fundamentalist Islam and settler-friendly perversions of Judaism, are well funded to gain support via the Internet.

    The Chinese actually need to use the Internet to stop the same thing happening there. The Internet can spread a wider view of the world. My guess is that the Chinese government is well aware of the argument I've outlined above, in far greater depth, and their policy is simply based around the traditional Chinese policy of using the media to spread cultural homogeneity, but with an eye to the undeveloped part of China rather than the developed part. This is far from stupid. Freedom of speech is all very well in a pluralistic Western society where you can look out of the window and see that people are lying, but much less effective for isolated agrarian communities with no standards of comparison.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  16. Freedom of speech on Internet by johnsonlam · · Score: 2

    The Chinese government know nothing about freedom of speech, all of it's statement is for it's own benefit. As a Chinese live in Hong Kong, we're trying hard to achieve freedom of speech but we're already under heavy attack of all the pro-Beijing propaganda. Yet they want to stretch their hands to western world, Trying to discuss or reply to it proof futile, just ignore the annoying Chinese government.

    --
    Hong Kong - International Joke Center (after 1997-06-30)
  17. At the risk of being labelled flamebait. by rainmouse · · Score: 4, Informative

    Murder rate in the USA is 42.8 per 1,000,000 people (freedom of speech and right to bear arms) Murder rate in the UK 14.0 per 1,000,000 people (freedom of speech) Murder rate in Hong Kong is 5.5 per 1,000,000 people (some limits on freedom)

    I'm not saying that freedom of arms and speech turn people into hate filled psycho's (certainly other countries with limited freedoms have very high murder rates) but culturally people are very different all over the world and a murder rate more than 8 times lower than the USA is not insignificant. We have no idea what the effect of radically altering someone's culture might have and like it or not, ceasing all forms of censorship in China will have a shock effect on many of the people living there. I am preferably interested to hear what people in China feel about these issues more than people in the West demanding on behalf of people in China.

    Please note that I had to use the rate for Hong Kong because China was apparently so low down as to not even be on the list of 62 highest murder rates, I note also that places under Sharia law were also absent from the list

    http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

    Please note that I cannot vouch for either the accuracy or how recent these statistics are, but then you can say that about any posted statistics.

    Personally I believe in as much personal freedom as we can get, but I felt the need to provide some kind of balance to the discussion and sometimes I wonder if we really have the right to demand and impose our freedoms on other places that work in a very different way, despite what the above poster said that all humans are basically the same and want to kill steal and rape all day, I'd like to think otherwise.

    I would also like to quickly address the above poster who said "In the U.S., our constitution (or what's left of it) was written specifically, to prevent government from serving itself instead of society. It has managed to slow the progress of greedy and ambitious people who seek to limit people in order to enrich themselves."

    I would like to draw attention to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States which states quite clearly "Americans have the highest income inequality in the rich world and over the past 20–30 years Americans have also experienced the greatest increase in income inequality among rich nations. The more detailed the data we can use to observe this change, the more skewed the change appears to be... the majority of large gains are indeed at the top of the distribution."

    Like I said, freedoms are good, but our own implementation of them may not necessarily be the best method when considering some of the results.

    1. Re:At the risk of being labelled flamebait. by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What would you say about America, if they removed the right to bear arms, and then the murder rate shot up from 42.8 / 1,000,000 to 200 / 1,000,000? I'd really like you to think through it, and then share your thoughts with me. I don't think that it is fair to compare them the way that you did.

      Also, in places with Sharia law, most deaths are most likely attributed to natural deaths, deaths due to holy wars, and justice. If I want to kill you, and I have a law to protect me, then it won't be attributed to murder. This goes the same way in other countries. I've nothing against blacks and whites, but I do want to use them just for the sake of illustration. If a white master kills a black slave, then do you think that it would be murder, *legally* speaking? Legally speaking, it probably won't be, but you and I can look in with a clearer mind, and say that it murder, pragmatically speaking.

      Also, another thing to bear in mind is how we deal with dead bodies that are unaccounted for. If a body turned up in a river, then would it first be classified as a murder, an accident, or what? I wouldn't be surprised if some cultures would just assume that it might have been just an accident, while others might initially classify it as murder.

      You gave disclaimers for those statistics, and I respect that, but I think that you shouldn't have brought those into the discussion. They just cloud the issue.

    2. Re:At the risk of being labelled flamebait. by divisionbyzero · · Score: 2, Informative

      Murder rate in the USA is 42.8 per 1,000,000 people (freedom of speech and right to bear arms)
      Murder rate in the UK 14.0 per 1,000,000 people (freedom of speech)
      Murder rate in Hong Kong is 5.5 per 1,000,000 people (some limits on freedom)

      I agree that the US isn't perfect but those statistics are kind of meaningless without context. The high murder rate isn't necessarily due to freedom of speech and right to bear arms. It may in fact go back to gang warfare and our inability to fully integrate certain aspects of our society. Obviously that's a problem but it's not due to freedoms.

      I would like to draw attention to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States which states quite clearly "Americans have the highest income inequality in the rich world and over the past 20–30 years Americans have also experienced the greatest increase in income inequality among rich nations. The more detailed the data we can use to observe this change, the more skewed the change appears to be... the majority of large gains are indeed at the top of the distribution."

      Income inequality is a real concern but I think the more relevant statistic is the poverty rate. America has one of the lowest in the world. Should poverty even exist in a country as wealthy as the United States? Absolutely not. But it's not as bad as income inequality may lead you to believe.