Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chen Guangcheng, a Blind Activist, Escapes House Arrest in China

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
    Y


    This is hardly a sign of Chinese public sentiment. Speaking out, even on the net, is risky for the Chinese and besides there was a good deal of media censorship on the incident in China.
    This is an overblown propadanga from the western media. Speaking out is not risky. Trying to rally against the CCP is. The Chinese censorship and propaganda is inapted and ineffective. The internet has literally obliterated the old and clumsy propaganda department of CCP.

    For the last decade or so, the Chinese government has been under pressure because its inability to control the flow of information. The only effective tool against internet is a complete cutoff. If you can read Chinese, you would understand that the attacks and criticism of the Chinese government are extremely common. And people are not afraid to speak out.

    Comment


    • #17
      It's not much of a human rights victory when China merely gets rid of a dissident by exporting him abroad where he will have less influence on Chinese domestic politics.
      If someone managed to get a certain prize winner out of the country, you can bet your ass it wouldn't be considered "not much of a human right victory" Getting Chen out of custody, into the US, and with access to media in today's interconnected world is a clear victory. He will not cease being a pain for China when he is out of the country. Despite all the attention paid to Chinese censorship, there are and always will be ways around it. The language tricks used by Chinese netizens to get around controls are amazingly creative. The influence that Chen will have from the US will be greater than he has had while he was under house arrest simply because they will no longer be literally at his front door.

      Would the terms of the first agreement have been better? Sure. But that didn't work. That they were able to salvage something when the first deal fell apart is an achievement.
      Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
      This is hardly a sign of Chinese public sentiment. Speaking out, even on the net, is risky for the Chinese and besides there was a good deal of media censorship on the incident in China.
      Perhaps this was a poor example, but what I was trying to get across is that usually when there is a US/China incident, public expressions of anger towards the US for its "interference in Chinese affairs" are extremely common. In contrast, this time, Beijing News posts an apology for an anti-US editorial on Sina Weibo. I think that is significant.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by HKDan View Post
        IThe influence that Chen will have from the US will be greater than he has had while he was under house arrest simply because they will no longer be literally at his front door.
        How much influence does the Dali Lama have?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by kyli View Post
          I disagree. The incident shows that the Chinese government is extremely pragmatic. If China is foolish enough to reject the obama administration's request and plea, then this little incident will blow out of proportion as the world media and the human rights activists will have a field day. Furthermore, it is not the first time that China allowed dissidents to leave China and go to exile. If you considered this as a show of weakness, then China has been and will continue to be in the weaker end of the table.
          Yes, pragmatic. But that pragmatism resulted in them realizing that this was an issue where it made more sense to find a solution than to dig in their heels. I don't know that another political entity other than the US could hope to achieve that result.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by HKDan View Post
            Yes, pragmatic. But that pragmatism resulted in them realizing that this was an issue where it made more sense to find a solution than to dig in their heels. I don't know that another political entity other than the US could hope to achieve that result.
            South Korea.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
              How much influence does the Dali Lama have?
              You mean does he have the kind of influence to get what he wants done? Then, none. However, he has been thorn in the side of the government for many years now and has done untold damage to the prestige of the nation. His accomplishments may seem trivial and one could correctly point out the lack of results, but he has accomplished a great deal more than he could have in prison or under house arrest.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                South Korea.
                The fishing issue remains, most recent incident only a week ago. Or were you talking about NK?

                Comment


                • #23
                  I'm talking about North Korean refugees being allowed to goto South Korea despite treaty obligations to return them to North Korea - to be shot.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    OK, point taken. But I maintain that any concessions from the Chinese government, be it about North Korean refugees or Chen Guangcheng, should be considered wins. The accusations of US weakness in this particular case really ring hollow to me.
                    Last edited by HKDan; 07 May 12,, 03:44.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by HKDan View Post
                      You mean does he have the kind of influence to get what he wants done? Then, none. However, he has been thorn in the side of the government for many years now and has done untold damage to the prestige of the nation. His accomplishments may seem trivial and one could correctly point out the lack of results, but he has accomplished a great deal more than he could have in prison or under house arrest.
                      Hardly a matter of national security and all the DL has is a soap box (and a Rolls Royce and a Gucci watch and silk robes and servants and body guards all paid for by donations from the gullible) but not one soldier from any of the countries he visited.

                      Even the Tibetan soldiers under India's command are going nowhere.

                      Originally posted by HKDan View Post
                      OK, point taken. But I maintain that any concessions from the Chinese government, be it about North Korean refugees or Chen Guangcheng, should be considered wins. The accusations of US weakness in this particular case really ring hollow to me.
                      They got soap boxes. Everybody else got jobs.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                        Hardly a matter of national security and all the DL has is a soap box (and a Rolls Royce and a Gucci watch and silk robes and servants and body guards all paid for by donations from the gullible) but not one soldier from any of the countries he visited.

                        Even the Tibetan soldiers under India's command are going nowhere.
                        If your point is that the DL lacks any form of military power, yeah, thats a given. But to imply that he hasn't impacted the national security situation is incorrect. If it is correct that China is spending more on internal security than on its military, NPC: Internal Security Tops Military in China Spending - China Real Time Report - WSJ then I feel its safe to say that internal security issues loom prominently in the national security situation for China. While none of them have a single soldier, tank, or submarine, the Dl, Chen Guangcheng and other dissidents/opponents of the govt represent the major players on the other side.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          The DL already lost the war of the gods to Mao. He was on the CIA payroll and could not even manage to threaten a single garrison. The best he has ever done was riots, not even armed riots, and the last uprising was fought between civilians and monks, the weapon of choice was the club, not the AK47. It has yet to dawn on him that Tibetans already lost Tibet and I don't mean to the CCP.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Yeah, Tibet is a lost cause. I think some of what we are seeing ethnic Tibetans doing in Sichuan is a reflection of their growing realization of that and the resulting desperation. However, he and they do remain a major security concern.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by HKDan View Post
                              However, he and they do remain a major security concern.
                              I don't see it ... or he be dead already.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Jad,

                                We all agree that there are bigger issues at play here.

                                The Chinese government censorship is not in the "stop-the-news" business. Chen's case is being reported and in fact, the photo of him having lunch with Gary was taken from a Chinese news site.

                                Private VPN clients are available to down load in different sites, so if Chinese net user want to "get out" via VPN, they can. The Chinese censorship is about stopping the debate that follows the event. The healthy dose debate that is critical to a society by providing feed backs to the decision-maker is clearly missing. It is the price the Chinese government is willing to pay and it is taken a toll on the society.



                                Originally posted by kyli View Post
                                This is an overblown propadanga from the western media. Speaking out is not risky. Trying to rally against the CCP is. The Chinese censorship and propaganda is inapted and ineffective. The internet has literally obliterated the old and clumsy propaganda department of CCP.

                                For the last decade or so, the Chinese government has been under pressure because its inability to control the flow of information. The only effective tool against internet is a complete cutoff. If you can read Chinese, you would understand that the attacks and criticism of the Chinese government are extremely common. And people are not afraid to speak out.
                                “the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all” -- Joan Robinson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X