Censoring the Olympic Games
[Guest post by DRJ]
The Chinese government confirmed today that, despite previous assurances by it and the International Olympic Committee, the internet will be censored during the games:
“Since the Olympic Village press center opened Friday, reporters have been unable to access scores of Web pages – politically sensitive ones that discuss Tibetan succession, Taiwanese independence, the violent crackdown of the protests in Tiananmen Square and the sites of Amnesty International, Radio Free Asia and several Hong Kong newspapers known for their freewheeling political discourse.”
The report states that the IOC “quietly agreed” to some of the limitations but will press the Chinese government to reconsider.
— DRJ
The IOC has been shown to be the toothless wonder, rolling over for the Chinese. Every assurance the IOC has made about concerns about the repression of the Chinese government has been shown to be hollow.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/30/2008 @ 7:30 pmI think that special efforts will be made to kick holes in the Great Firewall during the Games. I’m sure every h4x0r in the world will be trying.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 7/30/2008 @ 7:36 pmThe IOC ranks right up there with the Vichy Regime in standing up to tyranny.
Cicero (8438da) — 7/30/2008 @ 7:51 pm“…growing skepticism about the government’s commitment to pledges made when it won the right to stage the games in 2001: that it would improve its record on human rights and provide athletes with clean air.”
It was ridiculous for the IOC to select China based on ‘pledges‘ made to fix things if they were selected. An improved record on human rights should have been an established fact before selection. Instead a country that treats its citizens abyssmally was given the honor. The little credibility the IOC had left was lost with this decision.
Its funny that reporters, those jaded observers and chroniclers of the world at large, really believed they would have unfettered access to the internet. China is notorious for surveillance of citizens, touriststs, and reporters when the eyes of the world aren’t watching.
Why would they want reporters checking on Amnesty Intl. sites re their human rights record?
Why on earth do they think the government would want these voices to the world to see politically sensitive pages and draw more attention to such a negative issue?
This strikes me as an absurd level of naivete on the part of the press and the IOC. Obviously we expect it from the IOC though…
Dana (1cc5ab) — 7/30/2008 @ 7:56 pmThe IOC’s corruption and incompetence have been eroding the reputation of the Olympic games for decades now, I suspect that this year’s games will be a disaster. I’ve certainly no intention of watching a single minute of it.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:00 pmInstead a country that treats its citizens abyssmally was given the honor.
Point to any other time in all history when China has treated its citizens better.
And instead of asking why the IOC granted this year’s Olympics to China, ask why we granted her our manufacturing capacity and one-third of our foreign-owned debt.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:10 pmmaybe, just maybe, the Chinese will reach their usual level of awfulness and the Olympic Games will be killed off.
seaPea (251321) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:13 pmWe already know you don’t understand international economics; you don’t have to keep displaying your lack of knowledge.
Hey, and tell the guy holding a gun to your head forcing you to purchase Chinese-made products that I said, “Hi!”
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:14 pmnk, better than what? At what point does the oppression of a people become tolerable, acceptable?
I absolutely concur with you re our manufacturing (and foreign owned debt)… its disgraceful. However, that along with China hosting the Olympics is just further evidence of globalist political machinations, blah, blah…
Dana (1cc5ab) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:18 pm#8, Drumwaster, were you directing that at me?
Dana (1cc5ab) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:26 pmNo, I was directing that at nk @ #6. Sorry for the confusion.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:30 pmThose are not “foreign-owned debt”, it is “foreign investment in the strength of our economy”, and they are expecting a solid return on their investment. If I buy the same kind of T-bill, would you refer to it as “domestically-owned debt”?
Next question: where does that money come from?
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:34 pmDana # 9,
This is from one the defenders of Moscow:
nk (c1e92f) — 7/30/2008 @ 8:44 pmnk, what a compelling piece of writing. Have you a link?
You may want to read these interesting interviews with today’s freedom fighters in China.
Dana (1cc5ab) — 7/30/2008 @ 9:48 pmhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/06/china.humanrights
I have “quietly agreed” to not watch these abominable games and to make a concerted effort to not favor its sponsors with my business.
Ed (59b337) — 7/30/2008 @ 11:37 pmI think they fry their cats and serve them with snow peas. I can’t support Obama’s goal to strengthen China.
Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:10 amYou know what I think about this? They shouldxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxand all the others!
Apogee (366e8b) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:41 amDana #14,
Sorry, no. It’s from the book “Barbarosa: The Russian-German Conflict 1941-45” by Alan Clark, Great Britain’s Secretary of State under Margaret Thatcher.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 4:39 amTo put it in context: The Chinese people have survived for about three thousand years by enduring. But all their endurance got them was another generation under the same tragic conditions. However, that is changing. The post-Mao bosses have built a strong economic, administrative and military infrastructure which will survive the fall of the bosses and be taken over by, hopefully, a more democratic and freedom-loving leadership.
I would add that the Falun Gong with their Taoist witchcraft and the Tibetans with their barbarous lamaism stand in the way of a freer, democratic China. Their ideas are regressive vestiges of China’s sad past.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 5:45 am#16 – Vermont Neighbor
I think they fry their cats and serve them with snow peas.
— Ya know what? The Chinese government only banned dog meat from restaurant menus. We need to get a message through this internet blockade: “Hey, Michael Phelps! Don’t eat the ‘fluffy’ chicken!”
Icy Truth (c38387) — 7/31/2008 @ 5:53 amIf you’re serious about the Falun Gong and Tibetans, you’re an even bigger apologist for repressive regimes than I would have thought. Bet you think little kim and fidel/raul are doing a great job also. But we know the west and pigs like Carter and Moore long for communism here, if not a caliphate.
madmax333 (0c6cfc) — 7/31/2008 @ 6:55 amThe only surprise is that anyone was surprised.
The Chinese simply lied; that’s what Communists do. The only power the IOC has is to award the Games; there’s no way on God’s earth they would call them off at this late date — the only power they retain vis a vis China — so they have no choice but to go along with what the Chinese want.
Dana R Pico (3e4784) — 7/31/2008 @ 6:59 amYou realize that Tibet was only “free” for a very short while, otherwise it has been a part of China for a long, long, LONG time, right?
And that while it contributes little to the Chinese economy, it consumes a not-insignificant amount of money, right?
I expected Drumwaster to display a lack of anything approaching civility, but really Max, did you have to drop down to that same level as well?
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:05 amI am quite civil.
To those that deserve politeness.
So far, you’ve fallen far short of that minimal level.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:21 amSo butchering Buddhist monks is a good thing in your universe? Guess the former Burma and Commie China are on the same wavelength?
Reminds me of my Irish ex-pat lib “friends” who thought Clinton was the second coming of Christ and now worship the Lightworker. An ex. of lib hypocrisy is telling people that if Muslim women was change from the misogynistic nature of Islam, it is up to them to bring those changes because otherwise the jihadists tenets are their own culture. All those brave feminazi NOW members ready to fellate Bubba, Urkel AND islamofascists. And now you dudes think all is rosy with Chinese?
madmax333 (0c6cfc) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:26 amLet’s not even go there with the Chinese butchering of what are pets in this country, exterminating what were visible in Beijing and using for fur clothing otherwise. And your adored NY Times and Duranty were correct also, eh?
I’m hardly surprised. Here I thought that being older, you too would have been taught “Give respect to get respect.”
I suppose there was little time for such lessons in your house, what with the all the vulgarity and insults you had to learn.
Though I might have suspected more civility on your part. After all, didn’t you get some kind of warning from Patterico about your inability to play well with others?
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:37 amI don’t recall that claim being made. I believe the claim was “better now than they have ever been”, which is true.
This all or nothing approach really doesn’t accomplish much…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:39 amA host commie government censoring internet information during the ‘showcase’ of the Olympics. Now who woulda thunk it?
In other news, the sun rose in the east today, . . .
RickZ (c7adf5) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:40 amI was taught that. Given my welcome here by you and others, the irony is a little thick on the ground today, so I’ll just laugh and move on.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:04 amYeah, considering the was in which you spoke to others, I can’t imagine why we might have reacted poorly.
Again, didn’t you get a talking to about not acting like an ass?
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:10 amA talk you have obviously never learned anything from.
The point being made by Patterico was the “unnecessary” use of insults and profanity. There is a world of difference between that and the civility you appear to be demanding.
To quote someone’s comment above: “Give respect to get respect.”
You’ve never given me any, yet you demand that I give you respect? Tell ya what; you can demand in one hand and defecate in the other, and see which one fills up first.
I’ll be over here contemplating the rank hypocrisy you are displaying. And laughing at you, of course, but that would go without saying.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:19 amC’mon, gents. Cool your jets.
h2u (81b7bd) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:24 amI’d be more than happy to, as soon as Scott apologizes.
After all, I’m not the one who started off the day by insulting him (see #23).
“Give respect to get respect”, isn’t that was he was claiming?
Yeah, right.
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:29 amAnd insulting nk was necessary? Really? You couldn’t have simply disagreed? You were required to act as you did?
Interesting. I’d have thought you would be able to control such impulses.
I’ve not HAD to have the “don’t be an ass” talking to from Patterico.
I don’t recall suggesting you giving me any respect what-so-ever. Not only do I not believe you capable of such, but I also have no interest in recieving it from the likes of you.
However I find it the very epitome of comedy that you would use the REACTION you recieved to your behavior as justification for your behavior.
You speak of Irony and Hypocracy? Brother, I ain’t got nothin’ on you.
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:31 amLike I said…
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/31/2008 @ 8:35 amAn overview…
The legacy of 20th Century Liberalism:
The wish for perfection will always trump lessor accomplishments!
As to the Chi-Coms – Why are we surprised?
Another Drew (8018ee) — 7/31/2008 @ 9:02 amIf uou expected something else, that is your problem.
#20, Icy
So true. It’s more than I can think about. But the food chain has never been fair. Speaking of which . . .
You 2 guys, take it easy there. I happen to enjoy both your posts and I find Drum forceful, not offensive. Scott’s posts and ideas are always awesome.
IIR, Scott returned to the blog a couple weeks ago and sortof used a specific post to call out D.W. It’s like when I finally took a few shots at Reese Witherspoon; if she ever wanted to respond in kind I certainly gave her the open. JMO
Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 7/31/2008 @ 9:52 amI’m sorry we disagree, madmax. Or that I was not clearer. Freedom and democracy will come to China from the west and not from the past. And it will not be the chaos of post-Soviet Union because, unlike the Soviet Union, China has a strong administrative, economic and military infrastructure waiting for better leaders. Ok?
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 9:56 amAnd, BTW, thank you, Scott. My policy is just to not read you-know-who’s comments.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 10:00 amnk unbelievably wrote: I would add that the Falun Gong with their Taoist witchcraft and the Tibetans with their barbarous lamaism stand in the way of a freer, democratic China. Their ideas are regressive vestiges of China’s sad past.
Ohhhhkaaaayyyy…
What “ideas” do Falun Gong and the Tibetans have that are holding back Chinese freedom?
What should the they do to get ‘out of the way’ of “a freer, democratic China” other than to voluntarily sacrifice their religious faith (some freedom, eh)?
Enlighten me, nk. And don’t chicken out.
L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 7/31/2008 @ 10:19 amI’m bored at work.
TLove (b8e7b4) — 7/31/2008 @ 10:24 amBecause for sure in the case of the lamas, they want theocracy not democracy. The Dalai Lama, the Panchet Lama and three thousand other lamas keeping a people buried alive in abject ignorance and poverty. On the ragged edge of starvation with infanticide of little girls because there is not enough food and polyandry because as a consequence there are not enough women. Which they have been doing for centuries. There is nothing free and democratic about lamaism. The Great Wheel votes for you and you learn your fate when you are reincarnated. That’s darkness, L.N. Smithee.
As for the Falun Gong, I see them as regressive and not compatible with western values. More of an obstacle than a help for a more democratic China. It’s hard to get a grip on their ideas, goals and intentions because like all Taoism it’s a circle that gets you back where you started or nowhere at all, so I won’t say more than that.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 10:42 amnk admires people who are hard, like diamonds. Extra points for not “being a victim”. Link.
bonhomme (d737be) — 7/31/2008 @ 10:46 am#40 loss of religious freedom? How many pay with their very lives or are incarcerated in cruel fashion?
madmax333 (0c6cfc) — 7/31/2008 @ 10:49 amI know Walmart needs Red China to fulfill American desire for cheap consumer goods. Oh, perhaps those goods could be made elsewhere on other continents.
If the Eurotwats and our “loyal” leftist neo-marxists weren’t enough to drag us down, we can always count on Red Chinese leadership or Putin to see that American hedgemony is stymied. Afterall, America needs its comeuppance.
nk admires people who are hard, like diamonds. Extra points for not “being a victim”.
They’re the people who built this country.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 11:27 amnk, you have left my questions untouched. Try to stay focused.
You done?
How do the Tibetan lamas “stand in the way of a freer, democratic China”?
Once again: How do the Falun Gong “stand in the way of a freer, democratic China”?
You don’t have to agree with their beliefs — God knows I don’t — but to suggest that it is they that stand in the way of Chinese democracy is laughable.
L.N. Smithee (d1de1b) — 7/31/2008 @ 11:44 amTwo ways: They provide an excuse for more oppressive measures and they try to steer the people towards something worse than communism.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 11:58 amnk wrote: Two ways: They provide an excuse for more oppressive measures and they try to steer the people towards something worse than communism.
So it’s up to the ChiComs to crush them in the name of democracy, which defeats the purpose of communism as well. Yeah, that makes perfect nonsense.
L.N. Smithee (d1de1b) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:17 pmMe, too, TLove #41.
DRJ (e4b6ac) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:21 pm“I’m only beating you because you make me!”
{/Ike Turner}
Drumwaster (5ccf59) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:24 pmLN,
I think there is merit to NK’s view. If we view societal development as evolving, we want societies to move toward freedom and capitalism. When societies move toward other models, it’s much harder to redirect.
DRJ (e4b6ac) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:28 pm“…They’re the people who built this country…”
Reminds me of a scene from a Western where the antagonist has been fatally shot by the protagonist.
Dying bad-guy comments: You’re a hard man….;
Another Drew (a28ef4) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:43 pmHero responds: It’s a hard country!
“I know Walmart needs Red China to fulfill American desire for cheap consumer goods. “
Not just cheap consumer goods. I ordered a dress from a NY design house, not at all inexpensive. I received it yesterday and was shocked to see the Made in China label.
Anchee Min, noted author who was sent to a labor camp during the Great Leap Forward records that the totality of the oppressive society and the subsequent generational effect of forced behavior and thinking was summed up in her realization that while laboring 18 hours a day growing yams on the work farm, it finally hit her like a ton of bricks that, although they slaved away and were worked unmercifully (yet believing the company line)for the collective good, for the state, for the cause, they were still starving. The irony and irrationality of it all.
Dana (b4a26c) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:47 pmDRJ wrote: I think there is merit to NK’s view. If we view societal development as evolving, we want societies to move toward freedom and capitalism. When societies move toward other models, it’s much harder to redirect.
So is imprisonment for practicing other than a state-approved religion the method by which a socialistic society is directed to freedom and capitalism? Please, explain that to me, because I don’t understand at what point the oppression of the beliefs of some will give birth to freedom for all.
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 7/31/2008 @ 12:49 pm…another irony is that what does prosper in a repressive society such as China, is the Christian church. The oppressive stronghold of the potlicial system drives people to seek freedom where they can find it. I like to think its God’s way of sticking it to the State.
“A recent report by the National Catholic Reporter’s veteran writer John Allen stated that 10,000 Chinese become Christian every day. If this figure can be trusted, and other researchers affirm that it can, this would mean that by mid-century there will be at least 200 million Christians in China.”
“…over the past two decades, the number of Protestant Christians has increased by about one million believers per year (again, according to CCC sources)”
Dana (b4a26c) — 7/31/2008 @ 1:02 pmLN,
It’s satisfying to support the oppressed against the oppressor and the causes you cite have my sympathy. The point I was trying to make is that by doing things that result in marginal reforms, we may be delaying meaningful reforms because – in the short term – the desire for rebellion is quenched.
I think it’s also important to consider whether the changes are a step in the right direction from a macro standpoint. It sounds heartless and I guess it is, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t think about it.
DRJ (e4b6ac) — 7/31/2008 @ 1:18 pmDRJ wrote: I think it’s also important to consider whether the changes are a step in the right direction from a macro standpoint. It sounds heartless and I guess it is, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t think about it.
With all due respect, I AM thinking about it, and asking you and nk to think about it, but neither of you seem to want to.
How do you get to democracy, capitalism and freedom from by crushing dissident religious organizations that are NOT a threat to the state? If you think it’s possible, you shouldn’t have so much difficulty elucidating the strategy!
L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 7/31/2008 @ 1:36 pmLN,
I agree with you that we should help Chinese dissidents so this is a theoretical discussion for me. However, we also need to realize that the more we help the dissidents, the more it may reduce the desire among the majority of Chinese to seek freedom.
Sometimes people will only rebel when they see and feel the massive weight of tyranny. If the British had rescinded their more onerous policies in the Colonies, the most committed anti-British Americans would still have rebelled but would as many others have joined them?
DRJ (e4b6ac) — 7/31/2008 @ 2:03 pmL.N. Smithee,
The Tibetans are not a dissident religious organization. They are a separatist movement and the government they contemplate if separated I have described above. As for a perceived threat resulting in loss of freedoms from government over-reaction or even prudent precaution, what about all the discussions we have had here about Guantanamo, habeas corpus, the Patriot Act, FISA, the war against drugs, TSA …?
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 2:47 pmnk wrote:
So Mao Zedong was saving Tibet from itself by disemboweling its Buddhist core and instituting communism? How noble of the butcher of millions.
I have heard no argument that the Tibetans are a threat to the Beijing government. And once again, you gloss over the supposed method by which being held in a vise by Beijing somehow eventually leads to freedom.
Contrast the PRC’s devastation of Tibet with the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. The tyrant running the place was removed from power, but it was never the intent of coalition forces to rid the nation of any tenets of Islam. That’s the sort of thing the Taliban or the Karadzician Serbs would do, not a benevolent liberating force.
Please.
When freedom is abused to maliciously endanger the lives of innocents, the natural — and responsible — reaction is to restrict freedom to the very minimum necessary to protect the public as a whole. I know that drives the capital-L libertarians bonkers, but it’s true. If you’re annoyed at the indignity of having to remove your shoes at the airport, thank Richard Reid, an Islamic extremist who tried to murder a jet full of innocent people — he abused his freedom, and now ours is restricted. Outside of being part of an religious group outlawed by the state, what warrants the iron fist of the ChiComs on these people to the extent that visitors are prevented from even discussing it?
Wake me up when a Buddhist or Falun Gong practicer assassinates a government official, flies a plane into one of those glittering towers in downtown Hong Kong, or releases Sarin gas into the subway.
L.N. Smithee (b048eb) — 7/31/2008 @ 4:20 pmLN, DRJ & nk – Strangely, I agree with all of you to a degree, but would like to ask some questions to clarify things that aren’t clear to me. If you don’t want to answer, just tell me to fo.
1) Do you believe a triumphant Falun Gong and/or a separate Tibet and lamaism would restrict the freedoms of their people more than the ChiComs?
Apogee (366e8b) — 7/31/2008 @ 4:50 pm2) If so, do you see them on a par with a conservative islamic government?
3) If 2 & 3 were yes, and if they were to gain power, do you feel their own oppressive tendencies would create dissidents of their own? Should we then aid those dissidents?
4) Do you think that there is something in the cultural nature of China that requires a mass movement for change to occur (vs. individual efforts), and would the Falun/Lamaist movements aid or interfere with the emergence of democracy?
Apogee,
Like you, I see merit in everyone’s argument but I don’t know enough about Falun Gong and Tibet to answer your questions. I’m the weak link in this discussion.
In fact, the only reason I joined was because I’ve been thinking about how to democratize countries that have limited or no experience with democracy. It’s become the conventional wisdom to say that Bush & Bremer were wrong to throw out the structure of Iraqi government in 2003 and that it would have been better to keep the existing structure and fine-tune it. That’s an alluring argument but I’m not convinced it’s right.
How do you democratize a Communist or dictatorial state? I don’t know of any example in history where citizens have been able to fine-tune an authoritarian state into a democracy. (I’m not an historian, and there may be some but I can’t think of any.) It’s obviously painful and difficult to sweep out and start over — the American revolution, Japan, Germany, and Iraq are proof of that — but history and our present experience shows us a fresh start can work.
That’s what my responses were focused on so, if you don’t mind, I’ll punt on your questions.
DRJ (e4b6ac) — 7/31/2008 @ 5:16 pm“…It’s obviously painful and difficult to sweep out and start over — the American revolution, Japan, Germany, and Iraq are proof of that…”
I don’t think our Revolution can be linked to the Democratization efforts of the other three countries. Once outside the few urban centers where the British thumb pressed heavily against the local scales, American’s were self-governing to a great degree. A great deal of the irritation was economic: The various Tax and Trade Acts that restricted and penalized economic activity in the Colonies.
But, in Germany, which had only just progressed from Monarchy to a Representative Democracy to the Dictatorship of Nazism; Japan, which was still enmeshed in feudalism to a great degree; and Iraq, which was an authoritarian tyranny and had never known democracy; you had to tear these governments out by roots, and replant seeds that could be nursed into a viable democratic system.
Bremer had many faults in the manner in which he attempted to be a new “MacArthur”; but, de-Baathification was not one of them. His one main fault was to not communicate, and/or reach out, to the tribal leaders in the Sunni areas who had their own problems with Baathism, but got tarred with that brush due to their sect.
…I yield the soapbox.
Another Drew (a28ef4) — 7/31/2008 @ 6:43 pmYep, Tibet’s separatists are worse than communists because we all know that the Dalai Lama has murdered scores of millions of people like China’s communists have …
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:02 pmThat’s true, AD, and I debated whether to use the American Revolution as an example. If I recall my American history correctly, many historians believe there was significant Tory support here so it wasn’t a foregone conclusion that the USA would be born. Instead of rebellion, colonists might well have continued to reluctantly accept English rule with various forms of protests and objections. Still, I think rebellion is the “sweep clean” option while reluctant acceptance/protests would be “fine-tuning.” But I agree it’s not the best example of that group.
I also agree with you about Bremer.
DRJ (e4b6ac) — 7/31/2008 @ 7:10 pm1) Do you believe a triumphant Falun Gong and/or a separate Tibet and lamaism would restrict the freedoms of their people more than the ChiComs?
Well, Falun Gong is never likely to be more than a gadfly. They are a small fringe group. As for lamaism, I think it’s as evil a thing as has ever been born on Earth.
If so, do you see them on a par with a conservative islamic government?
I think lamaism is worse than conservative Islam. I see Falun Gong on a par with our Davidians.
If 2 & 3 were yes, and if they were to gain power, do you feel their own oppressive tendencies would create dissidents of their own? Should we then aid those dissidents?
I don’t know how to answer that. I am on the side of the Chinese government on these issues — it’s dealing with the problem now so we won’t have to deal with it later.
Do you think that there is something in the cultural nature of China that requires a mass movement for change to occur (vs. individual efforts), and would the Falun/Lamaist movements aid or interfere with the emergence of democracy?
“Cultural nature” is the clue. That cultural nature is changing through interaction with the rest of the world. There will be increased resistance to authoritarianism across all levels of Chinese society. It will be gradual and more of an evolution than a revolution. Which is not to say that China will ever be like America. But then, there is no reason it should be.
nk (c1e92f) — 7/31/2008 @ 9:14 pmnk:
That’s a stunning statement. How much international terrorism are the lamas responsible for?
The Branch Davidians were led by an apocalyptic self-proclaimed prophet who was dealing modified semiautomatic assault weapons, practiced polygamy, and reportedly had sexual contact and/or relations with girls as young as 10. What has the Falun Gong done to merit such a comparison and imprisonment?
Who’s “we?” Are you in the PRC right now?
L.N. Smithee (ecc5a5) — 8/1/2008 @ 1:34 pmWhat annoys me about this discussion is the feeling that you guys would be just as much on my case if I took the side of the Chechnyans against the Russians, FARC’s against Colombia, and the Basques’ against Spain.
L.N. Smithee:
How much international terrorism are the lamas responsible for?
How much international terrorism are the Sudanese militias in Darfur responsible for? Why do I need to repeat myself about the Tibetan theocracy?
As for the Falun Gong vs. the Branch-Davidians, that was an answer to a specific question about their relevance and importance.
nk (32be1e) — 8/1/2008 @ 3:21 pmnk wrote:
You don’t need to repeat it, but you do, because you can’t really make the case that it’s “worse than conservative Islam,” the inspiration for countless, constant acts of terrorism worldwide. “We” have to deal with Islamist violence right NOW. You have yet to make a case for the centuries-old society of the lamas causing ‘a problem we’ll have to deal with later.’
But you want the ChiComs to crush them like Reno crushed the Koreshis for … what? Nothing!
L.N. Smithee (a0b21b) — 8/1/2008 @ 4:10 pm