China Praises UK Internet Censorship Plan

mormop writes "The Chinese government has praised UK Prime Minister David Cameron's plan for censoring social networking sites at times when the government feels threatened, believing it legitimizes China own behavior. Quoting Chinese state media website Global Times: 'Britain's new attitude will help appease the quarrels between East and West over the future management of the Internet. As for China, advocates of an unlimited development of the Internet should think twice about their original ideas.'"

Comments

+1

[That Guy From Mrktng]

You know you are succeeding in fascism if China praises You. The Standard & Poors of Fascism.

Re:+1

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's hope politicians don't try to stall this plan, as the UK are at risk of having their oppression rating downgraded to an AA+.

Like slavery...

[jhoegl]

Just because others do it doesnt make the position more legit.

Re:Like slavery...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because others do it doesnt make the position more legit.

That's a true position according to the laws of discussion. But the main point, IMHO, is that UK government was humiliated by this comparison, and frankly, they deserved it.

Hyperbole

[cappp]

The Chinese seem to be enjoying the fine tradition of internet hyperbole moreso than usual. The PM did not in fact suggest there was any plan to shut off social media whatsoever. What he did say was

Mr. Speaker, everyone watching these horrific actions will be stuck- will be struck by how they were organized via social media. Free flow of information can be used for good, but it can also be used for ill. So we are working with the police, the intelligence services, and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people from communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.”

Notice the important qualifiers there. They're looking at whether it would be right. They're also specifically considering those communications used to support violence, disorder, or criminal behavior.

We can, and should, debate the legitimacy of what is being considered but the conversation is underminded when we allow ourselves the thrill of shrill, non-factual, accusations.

Re:Hyperbole

[Nick Ives]

If enacted, those provisions would be used against dissenters just like the Terrorism Act is now.

I personally know people who've were detained under the Terrorism Act for walking through Charing Cross station with placards in their bag on the day of the royal wedding. They were released hours later and I believe are planning legal action.

You're a fool if you think laws giving those kinds of powers to police to control social media won't be used against political dissenters.

Re:Hyperbole

[bky1701]

Of course that's alright. Censorship with qualifiers is all fine and good, right? China has plenty of qualifiers, too, you know. People who care for their freedoms shouldn't accept hollow excuses for fascism, because as history readily proves, fascists have no shortage of them. Censorship is never the right answer, no matter how many times nor how loud people argue that it is.

Further, I believe that the Prime Minister and in fact most of the House of Commons have no idea how the internet works, as the PM repeatedly talked about "media companies and social media companies that are displaying these images," as if the internet is a TV network where every site makes a conscious decision what to show. I was utterly shocked that this is the person about to (attempt to) regulate social media. Britain need to get its act together, because it is starting to look more desperate and fanatical than the US, which is a very low bar to set indeed.

Re:Hyperbole

[jpapon]

You do realize that means rioters would be armed too, right?

So instead of throwing rocks and burning cars, London could be the setting for a Wild West shootout. What an improvement!

Re:Hyperbole

[fremsley471]

...the UK is the most intense police state / surveillance society in the "free" Western countries.

That's bollocks. The UK has a load of CCTV (which seems damn ineffective looking at the results from last week) and ANPR is being aggressively installed without debate (next big liberty row ahead), but there's no separate paramilitary police (France, Germany, US National Guard [?}, et al.) or a nationwide police force under direct govt control (e.g. FBI). We almost certainly have a very advanced spying of phones and t'internet (hello GCHQ and thanks IRA)- and it's more than likely that all phone calls are monitored. But read up on Echelon; it's not just the UK.

I was in a Ventura, north of LA, a few years ago and we found out about the ATF. They came into a bar below our hotel and made the drinkers overturn their pints 'cause the ratio of alcohol/food in the bar's accounts was not the same as the licencing conditions. That's an intense police state.

Re:Hyperbole

[JockTroll]

So what? Rioters in the US have access to firearms, and yet you see no civil war in the street, just UK-level vandalism and looting. I should also point out that the Wild West was way tamer by violence standard than present day, shootouts were relatively rare and body count low. Today, the showdown at OK Corral would barely make news. And one last thing, some massive destruction in the UK would be considered an improvement by many.

Re:Hyperbole

[CrimsonAvenger]

You do realize that means rioters would be armed too, right?
So instead of throwing rocks and burning cars, London could be the setting for a Wild West shootout. What an improvement!

Remember the big L.A. riots? People in Los Angeles were essentially disarmed also.

How about the big Nashville riots? No? Probably because they didn't happen. And Nashville happens to be a place where guns are moderately common.

Fact is, most people trying to steal a flat-screen TV don't have a major interest in getting shot for their trouble, and tend to look for safer lines of work if the likelihood of getting shot starts going up.

Once upon a time, shortly after Florida made concealed carry legal, it was noticed that there was a spike in robberies of people in rental cars in Florida. Upon investigation (and the questioning of various people robbing people driving rental cars), it was determined that the people who like to steal things from other people had decided (correctly) that people in rental cars tended to be from out of State, and thus has ZERO chance of packing heat. Which made them much safer to rob than the general public....

From Australia

[GoochOwnsYou]

In related news Germany called from the late 30's; they think that your immigration politics are awesome!

Oh the Nazi's would have loved our immigration politics over the last decade or so.

Re:You are not helping!

[jbernardo]

Next up: North Korea praises your foreign politics.

More likely, North Korea praises your criminal retributions law, expelling families from their homes because one of their members is accused (not convicted) of participating in the riots - http://m.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/aug/13/england-riots-coalition-response?cat=politics&type=article.

The Onion?

[Ironix]

When I first read this headline I could have sworn it was an Onion article.

China has Balls

[bky1701]

As time goes on, more and more I get the feeling China realizes the absurdity of the world and wants to exploit it to their own gain. It takes some serious gall to go and embarrass your rival by associating them with yourself, but China just managed an astounding success at it.

Re:China is COMMUNIST

[sjames]

China has called itself Communist since 1949, but like most "Communist" countries, it hasn't really BEEN communist for most of that time.

Re:Restriction of speech is still necessary

[Totenglocke]

You do realize that "hate literature" is what is known as an "opinion", right? Are you really saying that governments should (I know many already do, but I'm talking about what the right thing to do is) have laws legislating what opinions you are allowed to have? Orwell had a term for that - thought crime.

An open letter to David Cameron's parents

[ciderbrew]

Some of you may not have seen this. It's just a bit of fun.
But too true.
http://nathanieltapley.com/2011/08/10/an-open-letter-to-david-camerons-parents/

Re:China is COMMUNIST

[silentcoder]

The point where it was NOT just state capitalism. That's about all that the USSR ever achieved as well.
Replacing many corrupt employers with ONE corrupt employer is not communism at all, not even a little bit and that's all that any of the so-called "communist states" ever did.

True communism can only be anarchic, which rules them all out. The very concept demands that the means of production be owned AND MANAGED BY the people who DO the production.

You may agree or not agree with that ideal - but it's a simple fact that no so-called "communist state" has ever achieved it, or even really tried to.

China didn't praise anything here

[wcoenen]

The original article is an opinion piece. It ends with a little editor's note that it represents the author's point of view only. That's not the same as the Chinese government congratulating their new UK comrad.