Slashdot Mirror
China Calls Out US On Internet Freedom
rsmiller510 writes "In an interesting case of the pot calling the kettle black, the Chinese government released a report criticizing the US government of being hypocrites where Internet freedom was concerned — criticizing others for cracking down, yet circling the wagons when it involves US internal security (WikiLeaks anyone?). And the Chinese might have a point."
If you keep saying the U.S. isn't all about freedom, we'll bomb the shit out of you!
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
China shouldn't be calling anyone a hypocrite. As furious the barking in Washington has been there's no bite, and nothing compares to China's outright abuse of its people and efforts to censor the internet.
Some keep saying:
"China should look at their own track record before criticizing the US on freedom an human rights"
and others keep saying:
"The US should look at their own track record before criticizing the China on freedom an human rights",
IMHO it's good any time *either* country points out abuses in the other and they should each aggressively push each other to improve.
One country criminalizes speech. The other country criminalizes theft. Forgive me if I see enough of a difference as to not only rule out hypocrisy, but make China's argument look ridiculous.
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union pointed to the civil rights issues, the freedom rides, the riots, excess of authority to argue that the US had no place in criticizing the Soviet Union for invading Hungary, Czechoslovakia or pushing the crack down on Poland.
Because racial tensions are equal to invading other countries.
China is just pointing at the US to justify it's own censorship.
To the references Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/11/china-us-human-rights-double-standards/print
To the Chinese report: http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/us/2011-04/11/content_12303177.htm
The entire report, "Full Text of Human Rights Record of the United States in 2010", is worth reading. Most of the items on the list are well known, and have even come up on Slashdot.
These are problems the US has that aren't being fixed.
I can still access wikileaks anytime I want to.
Can you?
213.251.145.96 is taking too long to respond on my end. (Qwest)
The fact that no publicly accessible DNS server resolves it further weakens your case.
You have missed the point completely, like a typical American politician. Before you spout off, learn what the word hypocrite means: a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
The point: China doesn't act like they don't filter. China has quite clearly stated that they believe that press should be limited. China has quite clearly stated that the group has more importance than the individual. China has quite clearly stated that they want to do what's best for their economy only.
The problem is the U.S. THEY say they are for freedom of the people, and install dictators in countries. THEY say the are for freedom of the press, and limit war reporting, harass reporters, and go after people who expose government abuses. THEY are for capitalism, and then bail out the companies that should have been allowed to fail.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
US politicians have a rather nasty habit. (No, not chasing people around in cloak rooms or playing footsie in bathroom stalls, but they seem into that too)
Namely, they like to straddle the fence, and are very bad at doing so.
Take for instance, the media spectacle of the Egypt and subsequent middle-eastern revolts. The talking heads on capital hill squirmed and looked at each other for DAYS before finally resolving on an official position---AFTER the brave people in Egypt forced their hands. You see, they had been caught with their knickers down. On one side, you had "Heroic efforts to bring real democracy and freedom by the populace"-- which is the anodyne that they spew here in the states (Even though the body politic has rendered most of these so called freedoms that we are supposed to enjoy inert, or highly restricted with red tape and restriction) and on the other, there was Hosni Mubarak-- "Our Man" who "Helped us" with some rather "Nasty Renditions"--and more importantly, the diplomatic bargaining power he brought to the table in middle eastern affairs. (Namely, their dirty underhanded dealings) Having to pick a side and stick with it seems to have ruffled more than just a few feathers up there in washington--- the concept of lasting consequences and of having the onus of that kind of choice on them makes them squirm like worms under the light of a Fresnel lens. Back-troll through the media coverage prior to the deposal of Mubarak, with emphasis on the position from capital hill--- and you will find lots and lots of deflectionary statements.
Same kind of thing with this "Pot calling kettle black" issue with China, and censorship. The US government, like *ALL* Governments, is addicted to power; namely, the power to control its citizens-- (But the US is more aggressive, in that it likes to control OTHER nation's citizens as well. Extra-ordinary rendition, et. al.) As such, it innately LIKES the idea of a serious crackdown on free information exchange. You can go just about anyplace in government where there is "Enforcement" of any sort, be it military to as mundane as city police departments, and you will find a highly prevalent bias toward wanting to control or at least obsessively monitor/record pretty much every kind of correspondence. Constitutionally protected rights to personal papers and effects be damned.
Take for instance, the rather nasty provisions in the US patriot act, which has come up for review TWICE now, and somehow (rolls eyes) keeps getting new lease on life-- specifically, the data retention policies it enforces on public internet providers. (like internet cafes and libraries) Handing over lending histories was only ONE of the provisions; Another that was discretely added was the requirement to provide, on demand, complete packet logs of persons of interest, without oversight. If Government Man wants, it, Government Man gets it, basically.
No wonder then, that libraries and such were up in arms over it.
Essentially, the US wants to maintain the *illusion* that there is freedom and privacy in people's day to day correspondences, while secretly spying on, sanitizing, and orchestrating "enforcements" on "undesirable" communications. Wikileaks being just one high profile example. Philosophically, how is this any better than China's approach? If anything, the US approach to censorship is more obscene and insideous, because it promotes false senses of security in the citizens impacted--- China at least doesnt deny that it uses strongarm tactics; the US on the other hand, does gymnastics to validate why it purpetually authorizes warrantless searches, siezures, and interrogations at places like airports.
Basically, the US is JUST like China, just in a velvet glove instead of a cold steel one.
Gee sounds just like the US oh, 100 or so years ago.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
And the appropriate response to the Soviet Union would be "You're right, we have civil rights issues. Racism is terrible, and we'll try to fix these issues." And to our credit, we have come a long way. In addition, we should respond "Hey guys, quit invading other countries!" (never mind the fact that the US continues to invade countries to this day...)
In this case, again, we should take a good look at the criticisms and not ignore them because of the messenger. Maybe we are doing a bad job of preserving internet freedoms, and should work to fix them. Maybe China is also doing a bad job.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
Indeed, the incarceration rate is a key indicator (if not THE key indicator) of a government's overall respect for human rights in practice (not in theory which is a useless bullshit measurement).
The fact that the US government incarcerates more individuals per population than any other country in the world speaks volumes about the reality of the situation, as does the fact that the vast majority of prisoners are non-violent and were emprisoned not for crimes against other human beings, but merely crimes against the state.
And the Chinese might have a point.
No, they do have a point. Even if they are even worse, even if you don't like them. The serial-killer child-rapist cleptomanic is still right when he points out the guy who ran the red light. It may be any number of things, but it doesn't change the simple fact that the truth remains the truth no matter who reports it.
And sometimes, it needs an unpopular perceived enemy to speak out what all your friends don't dare to say out loud and clear.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org