Slashdot Mirror
A Single Re-Tweet Lands Chinese Woman in Labor Camp
lee1 writes "A woman in China has been sentenced to a year of 're-education' in a labor camp for the crime of 'disrupting social order' after retweeting a joke on Twitter (which is entirely banned in China, but popular nonetheless). Cheng Jianping had repeated a Twitter comment suggesting that nationalist protesters smash Japan's pavilion at the Shanghai Expo, adding the words 'Charge, angry youth.' At the time, China and Japan were feuding over a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea, and groups of young Chinese had been demonstrating against Japan, smashing Japanese products; the tweet amounted to gentle chiding of the protesters. Ms. Cheng may also have been targeted because she is a human rights activist: she had signed petitions calling for the release of China's jailed Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo. She has been detained in the past for several other 'crimes,' including criticizing China's Communist Party."
Anyone using Twitter should be sentenced to a year of 're-education' in a labour camp.
What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
If you are a political activist in any country (not just China), don't post things publicly that are unrelated to your cause. Don't post things electronically that are or could be considered illegal, or be used as blackmail material. Remember that you are not representing yourself anymore, you are representing your cause. Everything you say and do will be put under a microscope, and the internet never forgets and never forgives mistakes.
Now that that's out of the way: China, you suck.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
No, she was imprisoned for making fun of the people actually causing racial unrest...
Really. Well I guess its not like in the U.S. where a sports athlete will be fined at least 20 grand for posting nothing out of the ordinary. AKA Terrel Owens, Randy Moss
you know, the snide comments "well, its almost just as bad/ the same/ worse in the usa/ uk/ western nation"
no
it actually isn't
when you confuse hyperbole and reality, you are no longer commenting intelligently, you are merely broadcasting your ignorance
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
And I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I can Tweet!
What would happen if someone tweeted a "joke" about a bomb threat in the EU or the USA?
Oh that's right, they get a visit by their friendly neighborhood police officers. http://boingboing.net/2010/11/13/twitter-users-re-twe.html
This is probably front page news because we clearly all hate China, and Twitter is involved. In full seriousness, relying on the humor of law enforcement/secret police to keep you out of trouble is a bad bet. Relying on that sense of humor when seemingly inciting violence against a nation with whom ties are already strained is an even worse bet. Is this seriously anything new or surprising?
Signatures are the new names.
I really am glad
1) not to be chinese
2) not living in china
3) not stupid enough to talk bad shit against my gov.
ok, so 2 out of 3 aint that bad i guess.
Who cares about the human cost as long as we can continue to get cheap electronics, right?
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Anonymity exists for a reason. Not using it if you want to post messages not liked by a repressive government is idiotic.
... ahhh, I bet that tastes nice and soothing ... I nice warm mug of strawman cider ... you're gonna sleep like a baby tonight.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
to China. I will pay for it.
No, the KKK were arrested for ACTING upon incitement toward violence.
The KKK are allowed to march and yell in public, openly, as is any group like that, so long as they obtain
a parade permit, WHICH THEY CAN, in the US.
But if you break the law, like, oh, I dunno, KILL PEOPLE, commit arson, violate labor laws, intimidate employers...
such as what got the Klansmen in question in the parent post put in prison...
in China, you'd be the government. In the US, you're arrested.
They care about human rights so long as money and violent media are not concerned.
Paradoxically, the Chinese leadership's need to quell
even the slightest expression of dissent, or the slightest expression of
free-thinkng, simply telegraphs the inherent weakness and illegitimacy
of their system of government. If the government is truly legitimate, is
truly based on the consent of the people, then it does not require such
measures. The most legitimate form of government is that which requires
the least repression of individual expression and will while still being able
to function in a stable manner.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
She has been detained in the past for several other 'crimes,' including criticising China's Communist Party.
So in the USA the Republicans would be locked up for criticizing the Democrats, and the Democrats would be locked up for criticizing the Republicans. With almost everybody locked up, who could work as prison guards? I guess this could be solved with some H-1B visas.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Its populace is in a frightening situation, where speaking out against the regime is often a criminal activity. Its economy feeds off itself and other countries, and is reflected strongly to foreign markets, but the smoke-and-mirrors reality draws many comparisons to Cold War Russia, specifically its unsustainable growth and complete disregard for things like environment and human safety. Its foreign policy is bullheaded and unrepentant - and they get away with it, because the rest of the world admonishes it with one hand and spoon-feeds it with the other.
Which ammendment is the "Parade Permit Required to Exercise Free Expression"?
Possibly because it didn't happen? Klan members were arrested and imprisoned for crimes they commited (murder among them), but they still exist today and hold public rallies and events without being imprisoned for speaking.
You seem to be confusing hate-speech with hate-crimes. Going up on a stage and saying that "group X is a bunch of subhuman degenerates" is certainly hateful, but you have the right to do it. Going on stage and saying "group X is a bunch of subhuman degenerates" while beating a member of group-X with a club is a hate crime, and will carry different penalties than just beating someone with a club would normally.
Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
when you confuse hyperbole and reality, you are no longer commenting intelligently, you are merely broadcasting your ignorance
...when you go and put your cart in front of your horse?
Or when you jump the gun?
Could it perchance be that you have failed to hold your horses, and that by bootstrapping your own argument in anticipation of hatched chickens you are actually tilting at windmills and thus producing a tempest in a teapot?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/18/pakistan.blasphemy/index.html?hpt=C1
"This month a Pakistani court sentenced Isham's mother, 45 year old Asia Bibi, to death, not because killed, injured or stole, but simply because she said something."
"The town cleric, Qari Muhammad Salim, reported the incident to police who arrested Bibi. After nearly 15 months in prison came her conviction and the death sentence."
USA's best friends, China and Pakistan. Awesome.
Seriously, no mention in the "free press" of the joke?
I don't have a Twitter account, but when I go to China I'll make sure that won't be the time I decide to become popular and make one. "Re-education" no thanks.
What would happen if someone tweeted a "joke" about a bomb threat in the EU or the USA?
The woman is a "human rights activist" who was "detained in the past for several other 'crimes,' including criticising China's Communist Party".
Clearly, in order to make an accurate comaprison, you would have to replace "someone" in your argument with say... Julian Assange.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
With all of the new surveillance requirements of our friendly government and the alphabet soup laws and treaties pushed on us by the **AA, we are not far behind China in this.
* Carthago Delenda Est *
No, it's just required to hold a parade, which disrupts traffic and commerce in the area for a short time. There are plenty of other ways to exercise your freedom of speech that don't disrupt anyone, and don't require a permit.
Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
Because "Being an anti-government activist lands Chinese woman in labour camp" isn't nearly exciting enough.
...they let you keep the piece of brain that they take out.
If the government don't lock up disruptive individuals who cause public unrest. The harmony in the country will be gone, and the whole economy will tank. Personal freedom is a small price to pay for a thriving economy. Look at the US and Europe now. Their freedom of expression mires them in endless internal silly arguments while not solving any pressing problem.
This is actually a popular view in China and the party actively promotes it. Our increasingly frustrating politics make it more and more believable.
More power to her! She should be able to tweet, write or say whatever she wants.
"Anonymity" does not exist in a communist country in complete control of your ISP. Got an IP address? Got an on-line account that requires registration (e.g., Twitter)? And anything you "submit" online is monitored; so you're fucked!
Correction: the financial human right they disagree with is "people have the right to make a profit off of the financial loss of other, to the point of causing significant suffering/death."
Soon America will be like this, if we don't start electing politicians who remove, rather than add laws.
It won't be as bad as inventing 2 wars against harmless countries countries from the other side of the world, with intention of creating boogiemen and plundering whatever can be carried.
Or overthrowing many south american countries' constitutional governments in the 70s to indebt them, causing around 100k deaths.
Or funding Israel, which also does its fair share of genocide on a daily basis, pretending they have a right to do so (and throwing lawsuits and smear campaigns at anyone who barely questions them)
I have no idea what china does, or doesn't do... But i'm pretty sure it's not as bad as what the US does on a regular basis.
I get a little tired of the bitching about China's human rights problems not because they aren't problems, but because people seem to just like to bitch rather than suggest what might be done. See the US can't just make China play nice and respect human rights that movie about Team America: World Police was a comedy/satire, not a documentary, if the puppets didn't give that away. The US can't just police China.
Now, the US could of course do things like refuse to trade or embargo China. Ok, ignoring any consequences to the US itself, what makes you think that would work? What evidence is there that wold do any good? It has been tried time and time again and never seems to improve conditions in countries, only make them worse. That isn't to say it cannot be a useful tool for security related issues, but it doesn't seem to do anything good human rights related.
In fact a rather strong argument can be made that the only way China will get better at human rights is if their own citizens demand it. They will have to force the change internally. Like with most things in human nature, people have to want to change before you can help them change. You can then also argue the best thing that the US can do for that is to keep as much free and open trade as possible. With free trade comes free information. though the Central Committee might not like it, they can't just cut off the flow of information, it would hurt business.
Free trade with China is producing dramatic increases in the standard of living for many people, and has actually improved the human rights situation from what it was. It is far, FAR from good but it is a hell of a lot better than when the great leap "forward" happened.
There's a strong argument that the best thing we can do is just to trade freely and make all our information and culture available. If you've a different suggestion then let's hear it as well as the defense for it, but please less with the hand-wringing.
Living in a free country you forget that things like this can happen. While it is true that if an American did what she did, they would be penalized. It is also good to know that the penalty should meet the crime and you would not be sent to labour camp. It's amazing and scary that a company that corrupt still is on the verge of becoming a global power house.
She was imprisoned because she is a human rights activist, the joke regarding the anti-Japan demonstrators was only a pretense. The PSC (the Politburo; the Standing Committee of the Communist Party) couldn't care less about a joke that makes fun of people they hate anyway.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
Serious question here. Do people assigned to these re-education camps actually come out thinking that oh, they had it all wrong, and they'll be on the right path once again? Because I have a hard time believing, after nearly 40 years of dealing with people, that this is the result. If anything, I'd believe they come out even more convinced than ever that whatever got them in trouble was right, but more cautious about expressing it.
I'm talking about what happens in real life, not what happens in Orwell's absurd fantasies.
.. Camp. Maybe it was twins.
Hey don't blame me, IANAB
If this is against criminal law in China, then this is a crime, not a 'crime'. Something being criminal doesn't mean it harms people in any meaningful way. I'm glad it's just China with this kind of thing.
No, it's just required to hold a parade, which disrupts traffic and commerce in the area for a short time. There are plenty of other ways to exercise your freedom of speech that don't disrupt anyone, and don't require a permit.
As long as you stay in the Free Speech zone, of course.
<Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
Every time you elect a lawyer to elective office you are guaranteed that you will get a flood of redundant, contradictory, unenforceable & expensive laws, thereby ensuring the perpetual employment of their colleagues who are paid handsomely to unravel, defend against & prosecute this utterly pointless bullshit!
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
This irony thing...you don't get it, do you? Hint: it's not what Alanis says it is.
I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
Meanwhile in the US...
A Single Shared CD Lands US Woman in Life-Long Bankruptcy
"A woman in the US has been sentenced to a life of bankruptcy for the crime of 'sharing intellectual property' (which is entirely banned in the US, but popular nontheless). Jammie Thomas-Rasset had shared a few Songs with other people. She has been tried and convicted in the past for several other 'thought crimes,' all involving infringement of US's Recording Party's so called "imaginary property rights".
Different countried, different priorities. China prioritizes its goverment scheme over peoples basic rights, so critics need to get persecuted. The US prioritizes having a creative industry over peoples basic rights, so ordinary people sharing culture will also be fiercely persecuted. China may be somewhat harsher than the US, but in principle they are bot just two different sides of a medal, and both regimes perceive free, uncensored information exchange between ordinary citizens as a major threat obviously to both business _and_ goverment.
such as what got the Klansmen in question in the parent post put in prison...
in China, you'd be the government. In the US, you're arrested.
Don't forget, the KKK *did* have a lot of influence in government in the early part of the 20th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan_members_in_United_States_politics
US Senators, Supreme Court justices, Presidents...
All that aside, I actually did attend a KKK rally once (as a protester, because fuck those hateful assholes.)
To get anywhere near the rally, you had to be searched by police, couldn't bring anything remotely resembling a weapon, and then the pro-Klan and anti-Klan attendees were separated from each other. The whole place was surrounded by local and state police, and national guard members, snipers on the rooftops, etc. It was pretty crazy.
Without that much security, I have no doubt that multiple people would have wound up dead, with the level of anger both sides were spewing towards each other.
Any time someone causes that much of a disruption to normal law enforcement activity, they're going to need a permit.
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
How is this modified as a troll? This is the writing on the wall and it will be too late to be disappointed once it has come to pass.
You say that as if free speech did not exist outside of those zones, instead of them being convenient public places to air such speech (something not actually required by the first or any other amendment).
Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
A Single Re-Tweet and a History of Human Rights Activism Lands Chinese Woman in Labor Camp
There, fixed that for you
I'm conservative, and I'm not scared of China's threat to our security. I'm also disgusted by their human rights track record. Not everyone falls neatly into one corner of the Nolan Chart.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
I actually *did* read it as "A Single Re-Tweet Lands Chinese Woman in Labor" - there was no between "Labor" and "Camp".
Ezekiel 23:20
If I tell someone how much I love them while beating them do I get less time then just beating them? How about if I'm apathetic towards them?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ms. Cheng is pretty hot.
Although Twitter is a place which you could share your opinion and stories, materials that related to the politics are always sensitive. From the nation's stand point, goverment does have reasons to lock up disruptive individuals who cause the public unrest. But I don't think most of the people making such statements are *really* idiots and should be 'sentenced to a year of 're-education' in a labor camp"
77 million dead. Mao was no strawman.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
"Who says this is a left-leaning website?"
This is a left-leaning website.
There. I said it.
I love my sig.
"... for the crime of 'disrupting social order' after retweeting a joke on Twitter (which is entirely banned in China, but popular nontheless)"
Which is it that is banned? Disrupting social order? Retweeting? Or the joke?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I only got to go to camp once. And it turned out to be a Christian camp but nobody told me that. I guess I should have known something was up when grandma suggested I take a bible but I was so excited, I said, "Yeah, sure, whatever." I was focused on the fact that I was going to sleepaway camp and that my friend David would be there. I hadn't seen him since he'd been hit by a car like six months earlier. But mom failed to mention that, due to the coma and brain damage, David most likely wouldn't remember me. I found this out when he said, "Do I know you?" Turns out he didn't. And he had a completely different personality. Now he was all into pulling mean pranks. Which I mostly went along with because it reduced my chances of being on the receiving end. Just as I was coming to grips with that, the first bible study session was called. Man, that was an awkward two weeks.
Correction: the financial human right they disagree with is "people have the right to make a profit off of the financial loss of other, to the point of causing significant suffering/death."
That doesn't make sense. What is "significant suffering"? If I operate a small business and I take money from a poor person in return for heating oil thereby depriving him of the food he could have bought that can be said to cause suffering. As the same small business if I choose to buy gas from $BigEvilGasCo I'm still operating within my rights.
The analogy is $BigWheatCo taking money from $SmallAfricanGrocery in return for food, thereby "impoverishing" that country. Or $BigPharmaCo choosing to spend money on advertising rather than giving it away. It is disingenuous to support the right of small companies to make money while denying the right of large companies to do the same.
Are you for the free market or against it?
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
We probably need a whole new rating system.
Beating someone while shouting racial slurs at them: +10 years
Beating someone while staring into the distance trying to remember if you left the oven on: +0 years
Beating someone while shouting "I love you man!" at them: Actually, that's creepy. +12 years
Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
Who knew that tweeting would induce women into labor...
The strawman is that 'the left love Mao', which they obviously don't - and you end up arguing against that non-point instead of addressing the actual issue.
Or are you just being smart in some way that doesn't come across on message boards?
Those douchebags still praise Mao
I'm "left", and I don't praise Mao. Or Stalin. Or Pol Pot.
I do know a lot of folk on the "right" who praise Pinochet, though. Better dead than red and all that.
Do you actually believe that? Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China#Rates_of_execution
Nobody knows what how many people China executes every year, since it is classified as a state secret, but most estimates have it at 5000+ per year, compared to 50 in the US. Also, USA has mandatory appeals which take years, in China you are gone very quickly.
Well, I'm not the above anonymous coward, but I'll have a go anyway.
What is "significant suffering"?
Examples of "significant suffering" are reducing costs by using chemicals in manufacturing that harm or kill workers or consumers.
If I operate a small business and I take money from a poor person in return for heating oil thereby depriving him of the food he could have bought that can be said to cause suffering.
You wouldn't be depriving him of food. It was his own responsibility to best judge the opportunity costs of his actions. We as a society should maintain minimum standards for the poor and vulnerable, but unless you were coercing him into giving up food then that wasn't your responsibility as a business.
As the same small business if I choose to buy gas from $BigEvilGasCo I'm still operating within my rights.
Sure, it's within your rights. What makes $BigEvilGasCo 'evil'? There's nothing inherently wrong with it being big. If it uses its size to reduce competition (no longer a free market, if barriers to entry didn't do that already), then that's harmful to everyone who isn't a company employee or shareholder, including you. But once again, this isn't your fault.
The analogy is $BigWheatCo taking money from $SmallAfricanGrocery in return for food, thereby "impoverishing" that country.
Generally, the problem with $BigWheatCo and other large food producers is that the companies get massive subsidies for producing food in developed countries, and can sell for below cost which undercuts farming in developing and undeveloped countries. And then the product of the developed countries is bought up by their governments and dumped on the impoverished countries in the form of "aid", killing off local agriculture because it can't compete with "free".
Or $BigPharmaCo choosing to spend money on advertising rather than giving it away.
Or maybe they should not spend money on advertising and instead spend it on further R&D, or just reduce the prices of pharmaceuticals because they'll have reduced costs. Hell, they've got bloody patents monopolising their investments, so why should they need to advertise if their pharmaceuticals are beneficial?
It is disingenuous to support the right of small companies to make money while denying the right of large companies to do the same.
We (or at least I) are not against anyone making a buck, or billions at that. Making a lot of money doesn't mean that we think anyone is being screwed over by default. The one thing that irks me is that people like you scream and whine whenever you feel that the government is screwing you in the slightest, but are happy to take it in all holes from the corporations. I'm against both.
Are you for the free market or against it?
I'm for the free market, or at least as close as we can get to such a theoretical construct. In a free market, someone can end up better off than someone else, but nobody gets screwed.
Goddamnit, I'm getting a prosthetic to fix that next week, you insensitive clod!
By the way, this is crap. Clerics can't sentence a Christian to death for blasphemy because Christians aren't subject to Sharia law. The case has to be under a civil blasphemy statute, which probably doesn't specify the death penalty. I what we have here is a failure of clerics to understand Islamic law.
In the CNN story, the incident sparking this was about "pollution" by a Christian using the same cup, which is a holdover from-- guess what-- Hindu caste restrictions, which Pakistani Muslims should be totally opposed to.
No, that would be \. This is /. - obviously right-leaning.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
He's a libertarian. You can't argue with them based on things like facts and evidence. They believe that governments are the cause of all evil, and that without governments keeping them in check corporations will be warm and fluffy.
See jcr? It works better when you use an ad hominem as well as a straw man.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Signers of Charter 08 ought to be looking over their shoulders.
http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20101118/husband-of-canadian-jailed-in-beijing-101118/20101118/?hub=EdmontonHome
These are acts of revenge.
You haven't gotten out much since the 60's, have you?
"The left hates China because of their disgusting intolerance of any human rights"
You mean like displaying the corpses of political prisoners in Body Worlds? (second link, NSFW) (third link)
I wonder when I can see Cheng Jianping in Body Worlds?
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Janet and Obama are already jealous . Dreaming, 'If only".
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
"A Place of Assembly Certificate of Operation (PA) is required for premises where 75 or more members of the public gather indoors or 200 or more gather outdoors, for religious, recreational, educational, political or social purposes, or to consume food or drink." - http://www.nyc.gov/html/dob/html/applications_and_permits/pa.shtml
Distributed proteome folding @ WorldCommunityGrid.org
Team Slashdot - Members:#1 Run Time:#1 Points:#1 Results:#1
What does that have to do with free speech or the first amendment?
Isn't enough that I ruined a pony, making a gift for you?
I agree with the late George Carlin ... "we are all f***ed ." I don't know if human beings can ever rise above their baser instincts. I am pessimistic.
It seems to me that it is the size of nations that leads to most of the worlds ills. I think we should have lots of small governments, loosely affiliated into a world body. Minimize the ability to accumulate power. That is the key. Power leads to oppression -- nearly without exception, and certainly without exception over time.
If you centralize power, people die. Primarily because centralization of power is a magnet for corruption that leads to ever more acquisition of power.
I cannot conceive of a world where human beings are free and oppression is absent, and yet, the absence of freedom is oppressive by definition. The middle road may be entirely unattainable ... except in the small.
"The KKK are allowed to march and yell in public, openly..." Wooo! Coeur d'alene Idaho!!! It's actually a beautiful place. Too bad about the KKK parades and white supremacy... But that's mostly the lower end of the spectrum.
China Today ... USA Tomorrow.
The Obama Administration is watching carefully the developments the China.
They, the Obama Administration, want to "Learn" from China.
China is offering manu "suculent" examples.
The U.S. Transportation Security Agency is ... shall we say ... a "Student" ... the "Chinese adherence for Order."
PS. Pres. Barak Hussain Obama ... will not seek ... nor ... accept draft to ... Election of President of the U.S.A. in 2012.. He will follow the example of Fmr. President Lindon Baines Johnson.
"Who says this is a left-leaning website?"
This is a left-leaning website.
There. I said it.
If Left mean smart, inquisitive, geeky, etc, then yes. The real question is why is that.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
Indeed. The tweet may or may not have been the straw that broke the camel's back, in this case, but it's clear that her being imprisoned is not directly or solely because of the tweet. The summary mentions the stuff that she REALLY got imprisoned for (but mentions it in a "oh and also, this is probably irrelevant, but ..." way) :)
>Which ammendment is the "Parade Permit Required to Exercise Free
>Expression"?
There is a great deal of very intelligent judicial review of the notion of "Time, place and manner" restrictions on First Amendment activity. There are a few areas where the courts and agency rules have gotten it wrong in my opinion (e.g., 36 CFR Parts 251 & 261), but for the most part the kinds of restrictions that have been allowed, have tended to be to the overall benefit of those seeking to exercise their First Amendment rights.
You don't have to think too much to see how the parade permit example might in the absence of any restriction cause the rights of one group of people to be abridged in the face of another group exercising theirs in a dominant or overly zealous way.
I don't agree with every First Amendment ruling that's been made, but I certainly do agree that some restrictions are for the greater good and for the sake of civil rights in general.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
What does this have to do with the lede? BTW, the Chinese legal system is quite robust, as is often said over here: China is a country of laws. The difference, as explained to me by my lawyer (who charges more than a western lawyer) is that China's laws are ALL legislated while western laws are based in court precedence. In other words our laws are tried and tested in the courts while Chinese laws are not tested anywhere and you have no recourse to the court if you feel a law is unfair. In court the judge reads the law and decides based on the law who should be at fault. Whether the law is unfair, contradictory or downright wrong-headed is beside the point: it is the law.
I suggest that I prefer the western system that at least considers right and wrong.
Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
This isn't an east vs west thing.
" By contrast, in civil law jurisdictions (the legal tradition that prevails in, or is combined with common law in, Europe and most non-Islamic, non-common law countries), judicial precedent is given less weight (which means that a judge deciding a given case has more freedom to interpret the text of a statute independently, and less predictably), and scholarly literature is given more. For example, the Napoleonic code expressly forbade French judges from pronouncing general principles of law.[10]
As a rough rule of thumb, common law systems trace their history to England, while civil law systems trace their history to Roman law and the Napoleonic Code."
In the EU hate-speech is banned too and rightfully so.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
It's fortunate for ordinary Americans that the government does such a poor job enforcing these laws or we would all be living in a police state already. Of course, the real purpose of these laws is not to enforce, but rather to render any citizen, even the most honest and upright, vulnerable to felony prosecution at the whim of the state. Those who naively support such proscriptions would do well to remember the words of Cardinal Richelieu who famously said, "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged". This goes hand in glove with another of his assertions; namely that, "Secrecy is the first essential in affairs of state." Ironically, it seems to have become the first essential in the affairs of individuals as well these days.
Doubtless the Chinese are following the fine democratic example set by the UK terror police in similar matters.
If I tell someone how much I love them while beating them do I get less time then just beating them? How about if I'm apathetic towards them?
Nope. The reason hate crimes get harsher sentencing is that they're effectively a way of intimidating all the other members of the minority group in question, not just harming the victim.
GP is suggesting that it is simply the number of laws that is the problem, rather than their nature. This is a ridiculous belief if genuinely held, unless you want to just scrap the rule of law entirely.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
In a free market, someone can end up better off than someone else, but nobody gets screwed.
In a planned economy everyone can end up better off, and only the multinationals get screwed in their turn.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
but Anonymous Coward is definitely a coward
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Well, if that's how the people of the EU like it, that's fine, but a reason I wouldn't want to live there anymore. In the U.S. though, freedom of speech, even offensive and awful speech, is a cherished right. Personally, I wouldn't have it any other way. I may despise what the Neo-Nazis, or KKK or even the radical religious groups have to say, but I'd never consider for a moment telling them that they're not allowed to voice their thoughts. At the very least, I like knowing who the ass-holes are, rather than having them hide and spread their poison secretly. If you silence them, you remove your own opportunity to rebut what they're saying, to convince them or others that they are wrong and to show the flaws in their way of thinking.
Declaring something to be hate-speech is also a potentially convenient way of silencing legitimate criticism. Speak out about $RELIGION, off to a cell with you for your hateful speech. Speak about $POLITICAL_PARY, you can be silenced, because your hate-speech can't be tolerated.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." ~Voltaire. Ironically he's from an EU member nation.
Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
...the bitch will conform.
Why the quotes around 'crimes'? Because they're not really illegal in China, or because you personally don't think they should be illegal?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
"A Place of Assembly Certificate of Operation (PA) is required for premises where 75 or more members of the public gather indoors or 200 or more gather outdoors, for ... political ... purposes."
I suspect they'd have to add more than laws to get this bad. Constitutional amendments more like. The judiciary can lay the smack down on this sort of thing.
The idiots the poster is referring to should be pre-empted and reminded that they are idiots.
That used to be call flamebaiting. Boy, how times change.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens