Spring Break
Chinese Student Association to hold awareness forum
Abstract:
In response to negative media interpretation of the Olympic Games in China, CSU's Chinese student association is holding an open discussion forum Thursday on the Lory Student Center plaza to facilitate cultural awareness and to give an alternate perspective on the issues affecting the games....
- Displaying 1 - 13 of 13
W Wang
posted 5/02/08 @ 6:52 PM MST
Are we talking about the same China?
Don't get me wrong, such GREAT imagination should always be admired. Or is it "hallucination" now?
I never knew or heard of any students get killed because of "thinking about open discussion"; you may say it's because the truth was well-covered, but that certainly didn't stop you from learning about everything, did it? Just out of curiosity, who's your source? Well, this is Friday afternoon, and I can use a good laugh, but just don't tell me it's another SOHO journalist who makes his money by making up news. That's gonna be such a cliche!
Don't get me wrong, such GREAT imagination should always be admired. Or is it "hallucination" now?
I never knew or heard of any students get killed because of "thinking about open discussion"; you may say it's because the truth was well-covered, but that certainly didn't stop you from learning about everything, did it? Just out of curiosity, who's your source? Well, this is Friday afternoon, and I can use a good laugh, but just don't tell me it's another SOHO journalist who makes his money by making up news. That's gonna be such a cliche!
Originally posted byPeace Love
Jessica,
Perhaps you could hold your open discussion forum in China.
Perhaps not.
I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion.
Let the Games begin.
feynmann
posted 5/04/08 @ 5:35 PM MST
Dear Peace Love,
Let me answer your questions one by one. First, I am one of the students who participated in the student campaign in 1989 in China.
To your first question, "Perhaps you could hold your open discussion forum in China. ... Perhaps not", the answer is yes. Even in the 1989 campaign, the government opened the discussion with student representatives long before the June 4th event. Chinese media covered the details of the discussion between student representatives and Chinese higher level officials. They formally acknowledged receiving student's proposals, and expressed the full attention to these proposals. I don't have to explain to you the confusions among protesting students (including myself) right after that open discussion. One thing I can surely point out is that, the "manipulating freaks" among student campaign leaders for whatever reasons were trying to make the campaign go to the more drastic direction. They claimed to continue "demonstrating democracy" until the real and the more blood actually are seen. Of course, as you could (or perhaps not) imagine, I found all these shocking and dark facts of 1989 "democracy demonstration" only after I watched, analyzed and compared various different documentation sources. Now let me go straight to answering your second question.
"I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion."
First let's face it, people's dying is always a sad thing. But your claim that this happened because Chinese government would not want to have a open discussion with protesting students is a false one. Since I was in that campaign in 1989, let me give you a first-hand facts instead of "news" media reports. Even long before the official discussion in 1989, we so-called "democracy demonstrating" students occupied streets, blocked the intersections in the city for days or even weeks. And Chinese government tolerated all these activities without any forceful response for days and weeks. After the official discussions, I'm pretty sure many students in protesting got confused and I was one of those refusing to continue blocking streets. That kind of situation got worse and worse, and you don't need too much common sense to imagine what should happen following that sort of riots. Now it's my turn to ask you a simple question, would the police in any democracy country tolerate people's behavior that seriously breaks the law, for example, protesting on the streets AND blocking the intersections of city roads in such a scale that many people's normal life was interrupted and offended? I can imagine that a police would be allowed to use force if any people would've violently done such things in any civilized society. Under that situation, people got killed is always a sad fact for anyone.
If you would be really a peace lover , would really understand the sophisticated nature of politics, and would really think of killing people as a sad thing, you should have never wanted the "game" like the above begin and should welcome the more understanding instead of misunderstanding.
Here is it again, Olympic in Beijing is such a chance to welcome and embrace the better understanding among different nations and different cultures. My point is, you may disagree, but why don't you give it a chance to see things by yourself before you really disagree? If you disagree only based upon what others told you, it's a even more sad fact.
Let me answer your questions one by one. First, I am one of the students who participated in the student campaign in 1989 in China.
To your first question, "Perhaps you could hold your open discussion forum in China. ... Perhaps not", the answer is yes. Even in the 1989 campaign, the government opened the discussion with student representatives long before the June 4th event. Chinese media covered the details of the discussion between student representatives and Chinese higher level officials. They formally acknowledged receiving student's proposals, and expressed the full attention to these proposals. I don't have to explain to you the confusions among protesting students (including myself) right after that open discussion. One thing I can surely point out is that, the "manipulating freaks" among student campaign leaders for whatever reasons were trying to make the campaign go to the more drastic direction. They claimed to continue "demonstrating democracy" until the real and the more blood actually are seen. Of course, as you could (or perhaps not) imagine, I found all these shocking and dark facts of 1989 "democracy demonstration" only after I watched, analyzed and compared various different documentation sources. Now let me go straight to answering your second question.
"I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion."
First let's face it, people's dying is always a sad thing. But your claim that this happened because Chinese government would not want to have a open discussion with protesting students is a false one. Since I was in that campaign in 1989, let me give you a first-hand facts instead of "news" media reports. Even long before the official discussion in 1989, we so-called "democracy demonstrating" students occupied streets, blocked the intersections in the city for days or even weeks. And Chinese government tolerated all these activities without any forceful response for days and weeks. After the official discussions, I'm pretty sure many students in protesting got confused and I was one of those refusing to continue blocking streets. That kind of situation got worse and worse, and you don't need too much common sense to imagine what should happen following that sort of riots. Now it's my turn to ask you a simple question, would the police in any democracy country tolerate people's behavior that seriously breaks the law, for example, protesting on the streets AND blocking the intersections of city roads in such a scale that many people's normal life was interrupted and offended? I can imagine that a police would be allowed to use force if any people would've violently done such things in any civilized society. Under that situation, people got killed is always a sad fact for anyone.
If you would be really a peace lover , would really understand the sophisticated nature of politics, and would really think of killing people as a sad thing, you should have never wanted the "game" like the above begin and should welcome the more understanding instead of misunderstanding.
Here is it again, Olympic in Beijing is such a chance to welcome and embrace the better understanding among different nations and different cultures. My point is, you may disagree, but why don't you give it a chance to see things by yourself before you really disagree? If you disagree only based upon what others told you, it's a even more sad fact.
Originally posted byPeace Love
Jessica,
Perhaps you could hold your open discussion forum in China.
Perhaps not.
I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion.
Let the Games begin.
Leewood
posted 5/02/08 @ 9:36 AM MST
"I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion. "
Does this make you guys feel better (or even look better)? How come China still has this population if it kills all the students for "even thinking about open discusstion"? If your assertion is true, half of the Chinese population would have been taken out by now. Come on, don't act surprised at the number of Chinese who "think about open discussion".
Why do some people always HAVE TO think, feel, or speak for others when they practically know nothing? Dose it appease your ego to preach?
Does this make you guys feel better (or even look better)? How come China still has this population if it kills all the students for "even thinking about open discusstion"? If your assertion is true, half of the Chinese population would have been taken out by now. Come on, don't act surprised at the number of Chinese who "think about open discussion".
Why do some people always HAVE TO think, feel, or speak for others when they practically know nothing? Dose it appease your ego to preach?
Spencer
posted 5/02/08 @ 5:41 PM MST
Originally posted byLeewood
Does this make you guys feel better (or even look better)? How come China still has this population if it kills all the students for "even thinking about open discusstion"? If your assertion is true, half of the Chinese population would have been taken out by now. Come on, don't act surprised at the number of Chinese who "think about open discussion".
Why do some people always HAVE TO think, feel, or speak for others when they practically know nothing? Dose it appease your ego to preach?
An uncountable number of people in China have been killed / arrested for expressing views counter to the mantras impressed on people by govt officials. If you live in China and feel compelled to speak against corruption, like so many students, govt. officials, military officers, social workers, etc. in Tienanmen Square did in the 80s, you must prepare for the worst. Not everyone was killed in that skirmish, nor during the Cultural Revolution, nor during the current civil war in Tibet. However, enough are killed and brushed under the rug by officials in control to make people in the West nervous.
The issue many people in the West have with policies of Chinese officials is that several violate human rights. In human rights, one major aspect included is the right to dissent without fear of violence, arrest, intimidation, etc.
China has a far worse human rights record than a great number of Western countries. Now, there are indeed violations of human rights in every country. In free countries like the US, these issues can be investigated by independent organizations. These issues can be talked about openly without fear of law enforcement detaining you, government employees monitoring what you say about issues on web sites, or violence from these very people. This is not the case in China.
The coverage of violence in Tibet is CLEARLY one sided. Looking at Chinese state run media gives you the impression that Tibetans kill Chinese more indiscriminately and in greater numbers than army personnel killed and detained Tibetans. Only recently was there admittance from Xinhua that a Tibetan was killed by Chinese police.(http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/world/asia/01tibet.html?ref=asia)
Unfortunately, one must peer at any number of Western media outlets to get far more video footage than what Xinhua or any other Chinese state-sponsored news outlet shows. You could get news from other outlets in China, just be ready to be lawfully persecuted. Look at this collection of of news video from the West in Tibet(http://freedomsbell.org/wiki/Censored_Tibet_March_2008_protest_videos_-_FLV_format), go to Xinhua's site (http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/world.htm) or station and compare what they say to what Western media outlets do. This is why there is great concern.
If you are Christian and live an China, prepare for trouble.(http://www.christianityinchina.org/Common/Admin/showNews_auto.jsp?Nid=478&Charset=big5). If you talk about the shameful acts of China's military during the Tienanmen Square Massacre or about an appalling memo sent from govt. offices to journalists in China telling them not to cover the events of that day on its anniversary, prepare to serve jail time. (http://therealnews.com/id/586/20071108/U.S.+lawmakers+take+Yahoo+to+task)
One last thing. This Xinhua article preface about Tibet brings across key concerns shared in the West on the subject of simply learning about what's happening of the region of Tibet:
"Once regarded as a mysterious region, Tibet has long thrown off its veil to reveal itself to the world. She is now experiencing earth-shaking changes in a shift from Medieval extreme backwardness to modernization.
However, the world still knows very little about real developments in this region. So those who once committed or attempted aggression against her yell at the top of their voices that Tibet is being invaded; others who once deprived the people of this region of all personal freedom shout that the human rights of the people there are being infringed. Rumors, distortion, suspicion, misunderstanding...all combine to form a layer of mist to envelop this region.
In order to know the situation there, it is imperative to look at the facts.
Therefore, the best course of action is to present them."
By all means. Let us know what's going on! Let people enter the region and interview and record people for Christ's sake. And don't repeat Chinese-state rhetoric that journalists need to be "respectful" before they are allowed in. It is clear that "respectful" in their sense requires journalists to go only where they say they can and talk to only who they're told they can. Let's kill the rumors, the pre- and misconceptions and OPEN UP the dialog.
Peace Love
posted 5/02/08 @ 7:18 PM MST
As you sucked down your starbucks, the students in China protested for freedom and the China opened fire.
Statistics and estimates generated from different groups of sources would indicate the murdered at:
4,000 to 6,000 civilians killed - Edward Timperlake.
2,600 had officially died by the morning of June 4 (later denied) - the Chinese Red Cross.
An unnamed Chinese Red Cross official estimated that, in total, 5,000 people killed and 30,000 injured.
7,000 deaths (6,000 civilians and 1,000 soldiers) - NATO intelligence.
10,000 deaths in total - Soviet Bloc estimates.
Would you like some cream with that coffee?
Statistics and estimates generated from different groups of sources would indicate the murdered at:
4,000 to 6,000 civilians killed - Edward Timperlake.
2,600 had officially died by the morning of June 4 (later denied) - the Chinese Red Cross.
An unnamed Chinese Red Cross official estimated that, in total, 5,000 people killed and 30,000 injured.
7,000 deaths (6,000 civilians and 1,000 soldiers) - NATO intelligence.
10,000 deaths in total - Soviet Bloc estimates.
Would you like some cream with that coffee?
Paul
posted 5/03/08 @ 12:58 AM MST
I am currently working for CSU and I was one of the protesting students in June 4th, 1989. As much as I know, the number of civilians being killed that night is about 250. I never forget that night. But I don't like your exageration here.
Originally posted byLeewood
"I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion. "
Does this make you guys feel better (or even look better)? How come China still has this population if it kills all the students for "even thinking about open discusstion"? If your assertion is true, half of the Chinese population would have been taken out by now. Come on, don't act surprised at the number of Chinese who "think about open discussion".
Why do some people always HAVE TO think, feel, or speak for others when they practically know nothing? Dose it appease your ego to preach?
Spencer WIlliams
posted 5/05/08 @ 6:21 PM MST
Man, I wish the QUOTE tag on this site was more versatile. Anyway...
feynmann - I wanted to respond to something you said:
"would the police in any democracy country tolerate people's behavior that seriously breaks the law, for example, protesting on the streets AND blocking the intersections of city roads in such a scale that many people's normal life was interrupted and offended? I can imagine that a police would be allowed to use force if any people would've violently done such things in any civilized society. Under that situation, people got killed is always a sad fact for anyone. "
Riot control is necessary for any functioning country. That I totally agree with. I was not fully considering the fact that streets were blocked for weeks. I do thank you for reminding us of this.
The huge reservation comes with the type of force the police and military used during those days. For instance, there is clear video footage of an AMBULANCE DRIVER being shot and killed in tape that was SMUGGLED OUT of the country so that we could find out what happened on those days and not simply rely on word of mouth and official reports, not to discredit anyone's account here. I only mean that to understand an event that tragic requires confirmation from a variety of sources. Understanding first hand accounts like yours, feynmann, is indeed crucial to our understanding.
Also, people were shot and killed who were merely standing on their porches or in their houses. The type of ammunition used were not riot control water/rubber bullets, but the kind that spiral out when they make contact (AKA anti-personnel bullets common for military skirmishes, terrible choice for citizens protesting / innocent bystanders) Talk about peoples' personal lives being interrupted and offended.
If any police / military officer killed people in their homes or paramedics, they would be severely reprimanded. Especially if they did so intentionally, as this is once again clearly and indiscriminately discernible in footage journalists took who were wise to keep quite about why they had until they left the country. It would relieve me to know that the people responsible for the casualties answered for what they did, but somehow I doubt they have. Instead, it's more apparent that the people in the protests had to answer for what they did via public TV executions.
Also, let's remember how the video we have of this event was snuck out of the country. The video of the infamous Tank Man was floating in a toilet tank when Public Security searched Charles Cole's room (the gentleman who took that video) and luckily found nothing. Only after he slunk back into his room did he recover that video. Even if his story is anecdotal, there was much opposition from Chinese govt. to sharing this event through media, was there not? If they truly had nothing to hide or be ashamed about, why is there so much concern among them to censor an event like this?
-------------
Also, something no one has talked about that we GOTTA is Internet censorship. It is difficult to impossible to find dissent searching through google.cn and yahoo.cn. We can thank our own Google and Yahoo for helping to censor the Internet there and report people who attempt to "subvert state power", by the way. To this day, one cannot go to these sites, type "Tiananmen" in the search box, press enter, and be bombarded by pictures of the Tank Man.
What if you lived in China and wanted to search through google.com instead? Well, thanks to browsers like Tor and groups like the UC Berkeley China Internet Project, it is possible to surf more anonymously, however you do so at the risk of being apprehended. In free democratic countries, such censorship of the Internet would be deemed appalling. I am already appalled by moves in Congress that are supposedly in the interest of protecting kids from porn. Restricting what sites grown ups can and cannot go to is insulting, and obviously stifles free speech.
And now, a final word on slavery in Tibet. If there is anything one can be thankful for regarding China's "induction" of Tibet, it is that slavery was abolished and that people who were socially stratified were given alternative means for acquiring necessities. However, at what cost? At the cost of forcefully assimilating a people into another culture. Our leaders in the past did that to Native Americans and, once again, it remains as an embarrassment, an action that government agencies to this day work to reconcile for. (Although, obviously, there are still problems and unaddressed grievances, but NO THREAT of arrest or goonery if you express or act upon them). I am not surprised that there are Tibetan expatriates who would like to see slavery returned. At least US sentiments coincide with official Chinese ones on that matter.
On the other matters of the treatment of people who do things un-Chinese, you must understand, feynmann and A CSU Alumnus from China, the reservations in the US to "embrace" the Republic of China. The people of China rock, the leaders who let atrocities like these slide are brutal. We have similar leaders and unfortunately, through a combination of miseducation and plain obstinacy, they have emphatic supporters. Once again, in free democracies, there is room for dissent and action upon it without fear of being arrested, treated inhumanely in prison, publicly humiliated on national television, etc.
On a final note, please please PLEASE take a look at the links I've shared in my posts and tell me your opinions, feynmann and A CSU Alumnus from China, or anyone else who has lived in the great country. A few more sources that have really made me think about events and life in China that I am anxious to hear your thoughts on are:
The Tank Man: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2300254722104314948&q=the+tank+man&ei=PlIfSIWdJpDCqAPssdm3AQ
On stuffing dissent, and specters of The Great Leap Forward:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/46d53b1e-df1d-11dc-91d4-0000779fd2ac.html
(Take a look at the disturbing video interview as well)
Xiao Qiang, director of Berkeley's China Internet Project describes the project's purpose and their concerns:
http://savegooglefreechina.org/2006/02/21/statement-by-xiao-qiang-china-internet-project-the-graduate-school-of-journalism-university-of-california-at-berkeley.aspx
(I know skepticism surrounds expatriate former student protest leaders in Tienanmen, but the issues he presents are unavoidable)
feynmann - I wanted to respond to something you said:
"would the police in any democracy country tolerate people's behavior that seriously breaks the law, for example, protesting on the streets AND blocking the intersections of city roads in such a scale that many people's normal life was interrupted and offended? I can imagine that a police would be allowed to use force if any people would've violently done such things in any civilized society. Under that situation, people got killed is always a sad fact for anyone. "
Riot control is necessary for any functioning country. That I totally agree with. I was not fully considering the fact that streets were blocked for weeks. I do thank you for reminding us of this.
The huge reservation comes with the type of force the police and military used during those days. For instance, there is clear video footage of an AMBULANCE DRIVER being shot and killed in tape that was SMUGGLED OUT of the country so that we could find out what happened on those days and not simply rely on word of mouth and official reports, not to discredit anyone's account here. I only mean that to understand an event that tragic requires confirmation from a variety of sources. Understanding first hand accounts like yours, feynmann, is indeed crucial to our understanding.
Also, people were shot and killed who were merely standing on their porches or in their houses. The type of ammunition used were not riot control water/rubber bullets, but the kind that spiral out when they make contact (AKA anti-personnel bullets common for military skirmishes, terrible choice for citizens protesting / innocent bystanders) Talk about peoples' personal lives being interrupted and offended.
If any police / military officer killed people in their homes or paramedics, they would be severely reprimanded. Especially if they did so intentionally, as this is once again clearly and indiscriminately discernible in footage journalists took who were wise to keep quite about why they had until they left the country. It would relieve me to know that the people responsible for the casualties answered for what they did, but somehow I doubt they have. Instead, it's more apparent that the people in the protests had to answer for what they did via public TV executions.
Also, let's remember how the video we have of this event was snuck out of the country. The video of the infamous Tank Man was floating in a toilet tank when Public Security searched Charles Cole's room (the gentleman who took that video) and luckily found nothing. Only after he slunk back into his room did he recover that video. Even if his story is anecdotal, there was much opposition from Chinese govt. to sharing this event through media, was there not? If they truly had nothing to hide or be ashamed about, why is there so much concern among them to censor an event like this?
-------------
Also, something no one has talked about that we GOTTA is Internet censorship. It is difficult to impossible to find dissent searching through google.cn and yahoo.cn. We can thank our own Google and Yahoo for helping to censor the Internet there and report people who attempt to "subvert state power", by the way. To this day, one cannot go to these sites, type "Tiananmen" in the search box, press enter, and be bombarded by pictures of the Tank Man.
What if you lived in China and wanted to search through google.com instead? Well, thanks to browsers like Tor and groups like the UC Berkeley China Internet Project, it is possible to surf more anonymously, however you do so at the risk of being apprehended. In free democratic countries, such censorship of the Internet would be deemed appalling. I am already appalled by moves in Congress that are supposedly in the interest of protecting kids from porn. Restricting what sites grown ups can and cannot go to is insulting, and obviously stifles free speech.
And now, a final word on slavery in Tibet. If there is anything one can be thankful for regarding China's "induction" of Tibet, it is that slavery was abolished and that people who were socially stratified were given alternative means for acquiring necessities. However, at what cost? At the cost of forcefully assimilating a people into another culture. Our leaders in the past did that to Native Americans and, once again, it remains as an embarrassment, an action that government agencies to this day work to reconcile for. (Although, obviously, there are still problems and unaddressed grievances, but NO THREAT of arrest or goonery if you express or act upon them). I am not surprised that there are Tibetan expatriates who would like to see slavery returned. At least US sentiments coincide with official Chinese ones on that matter.
On the other matters of the treatment of people who do things un-Chinese, you must understand, feynmann and A CSU Alumnus from China, the reservations in the US to "embrace" the Republic of China. The people of China rock, the leaders who let atrocities like these slide are brutal. We have similar leaders and unfortunately, through a combination of miseducation and plain obstinacy, they have emphatic supporters. Once again, in free democracies, there is room for dissent and action upon it without fear of being arrested, treated inhumanely in prison, publicly humiliated on national television, etc.
On a final note, please please PLEASE take a look at the links I've shared in my posts and tell me your opinions, feynmann and A CSU Alumnus from China, or anyone else who has lived in the great country. A few more sources that have really made me think about events and life in China that I am anxious to hear your thoughts on are:
The Tank Man: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2300254722104314948&q=the+tank+man&ei=PlIfSIWdJpDCqAPssdm3AQ
On stuffing dissent, and specters of The Great Leap Forward:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/46d53b1e-df1d-11dc-91d4-0000779fd2ac.html
(Take a look at the disturbing video interview as well)
Xiao Qiang, director of Berkeley's China Internet Project describes the project's purpose and their concerns:
http://savegooglefreechina.org/2006/02/21/statement-by-xiao-qiang-china-internet-project-the-graduate-school-of-journalism-university-of-california-at-berkeley.aspx
(I know skepticism surrounds expatriate former student protest leaders in Tienanmen, but the issues he presents are unavoidable)
A CSU Alumnus from China
posted 5/03/08 @ 1:16 AM MST
I have lived in the US more than 12 years. Occasionally, I saw a Free Tibet sticker on the car bumper. Whenever I saw that, I could not help but thinking whether the person who put that sticker on the bumper know what "Free Tibet" truly means. In late 1950s, there was a great thing happened in Tibet: slaves and serfs, the majority in Tibetan population, were set free. This historic achievement was lead by the Chinese communist party and Chinese government. The Chinese communist party has made ots of mistakes, but one thing the party did right was: it set the slaves and serfs free in Tibet in late 1950s. If you want to learn more about Tibet, you can go to this website http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html. You can find lots of useful information there. One thing I want to point out, "Free Tibet" was first called by those Tibetans who have been exiled in the US and other countries since late 1950s. Most of the exiled Tibetans used to be slave owners and serf landlords.
As for the T Square tragedy, I would agree that the Chinese government should be rebuked for its action. In May 1989, I was protesting on the street in a city 500 miles away from Beijing. I was very mad at the measures taken by the government and was in a big sorrow after June 4th. However, in 1996, when I watched a TV program "TianAnMen" in the US, my view toward the T Square event changed a bit. One of the T Square protest leaders said: she knew the government would take actions; blood would be needed for the democracy in China; but she did not want to be the one to bleed. The fact was, none of the protest leaders died or injured. Most of them flee to US or European countries with the help of US and other countries' embassies. In August 1989, I had a chance to stop by Beijing. I met a few friends who lived in Beijing during that period of the time and they all went on street protesting. What they told me was there would be more than one hundred died. In my opinion, June 4th in 1989 was the darkest moment of modern Chinese history and what the government did was shameful and unforgivable. To my regret, the tragedy might have been avoided if the protest leaders had more wisdom and political sense, but the leaders were too young at that time and they should not be blamed.
One month ago, house speaker Nancy Pelosi met Dalai Lama and told the audience: "If freedom-loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China's oppression in China and Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak on behalf of human rights anywhere in the world." Her statement implied that one goal of her action was to pursue the moral authority. I wonder whether her view represents those Americans who criticize China. It makes me worry that if these people care China or truly care their authority.
Not very long time ago, my daughter, a 4th grader, brought home a handout from school. That handout was about Chinese history and listed major events in China's history. One event on the handout was the Opium War: which was said caused by the Chinese government's ban on free trade of Opium, a mecidine. I felt astonished by how the histoty has been taught in the US. Opium, which was not allowed to be traded in UK that time, was sent to China and caused epidemic of addiction in China. For an obvious reason, the Chinese government banned the trade of Opium but it resulted in a war, which Britain attacked China. I felt very astonished when I found out how the history was taught in an elimentary school in the US. How can America keep its moral athority if the history is taught like this? How Americans can have a fair moral athority if they have been taught like this or have been exposed to the biased media report?
I urge those Americans who care China talk to the Chinese students and scholars at CSU or other universities. The Chinese students would be a good and reliable resource for you to know China.
As for the T Square tragedy, I would agree that the Chinese government should be rebuked for its action. In May 1989, I was protesting on the street in a city 500 miles away from Beijing. I was very mad at the measures taken by the government and was in a big sorrow after June 4th. However, in 1996, when I watched a TV program "TianAnMen" in the US, my view toward the T Square event changed a bit. One of the T Square protest leaders said: she knew the government would take actions; blood would be needed for the democracy in China; but she did not want to be the one to bleed. The fact was, none of the protest leaders died or injured. Most of them flee to US or European countries with the help of US and other countries' embassies. In August 1989, I had a chance to stop by Beijing. I met a few friends who lived in Beijing during that period of the time and they all went on street protesting. What they told me was there would be more than one hundred died. In my opinion, June 4th in 1989 was the darkest moment of modern Chinese history and what the government did was shameful and unforgivable. To my regret, the tragedy might have been avoided if the protest leaders had more wisdom and political sense, but the leaders were too young at that time and they should not be blamed.
One month ago, house speaker Nancy Pelosi met Dalai Lama and told the audience: "If freedom-loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China's oppression in China and Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak on behalf of human rights anywhere in the world." Her statement implied that one goal of her action was to pursue the moral authority. I wonder whether her view represents those Americans who criticize China. It makes me worry that if these people care China or truly care their authority.
Not very long time ago, my daughter, a 4th grader, brought home a handout from school. That handout was about Chinese history and listed major events in China's history. One event on the handout was the Opium War: which was said caused by the Chinese government's ban on free trade of Opium, a mecidine. I felt astonished by how the histoty has been taught in the US. Opium, which was not allowed to be traded in UK that time, was sent to China and caused epidemic of addiction in China. For an obvious reason, the Chinese government banned the trade of Opium but it resulted in a war, which Britain attacked China. I felt very astonished when I found out how the history was taught in an elimentary school in the US. How can America keep its moral athority if the history is taught like this? How Americans can have a fair moral athority if they have been taught like this or have been exposed to the biased media report?
I urge those Americans who care China talk to the Chinese students and scholars at CSU or other universities. The Chinese students would be a good and reliable resource for you to know China.
Spencer
posted 5/03/08 @ 9:57 PM MST
Peace Love, I'm not sure who your comments were directed towards, but I did want to clarify that at the beginning of my post, when I said "An uncountable number" of people had lost their lives and had been injured in the summer of 1989, I meant "An unknowable number". I do appreciate you posting statistics. It is only regrettable that these estimates must vy with official records that greatly underestimate. Unless we simply throw out the official tally as made up.
It is highly regrettable when one must do that to government reports/research. One could so the same with the Warren Report looking at the Kennedy assassination based on what we know now about those events.
A CSU Alumnus from China, I am very glad to see your post. I greatly regret that I missed the meeting that this article is about with the CSSA. I am continually open to learning more. I have been shocked by what people have shared about their tumultuous experiences in other countries. Clearly, people in the US also have their fair share of stories.
When Pelosi talks about moral authority, there is defintely an appearance of her making grand claims about US moral authority. I strongly believe that anyone paying attention to politics and history realizes that no country's leaders could be said to have the greatest moral authority. If we were to measure something like level of moral authortiy, we would be more wise to look at people who have less power.
The United States has commited war crimes across the world. These have been committed by various goverment leaders through commands to our national security forces (armed services, FBI, CIA, etc.). Like China, we have had tremendous confusing periods of state apparatuses doing harm to the very people they are sworn to protect. The Civil Rights period, during which one of our most civil presidents was demonized (JFK) as well as some of the world's most impressive leaders and movements (Martin L King, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy, Fred Hampton, John Lennon, etc)-- is the most obvious example of the bizarre turning on it's own people that our leaders have commanded/encouraged our armed services, law enforcement, and propaganda arms to do. It is shameful. We must never forget these things and continue to encourage others to discourage others from ever believing such acts are worth commiting.
A CSU Alumnus from China, I find it difficult to be a citizen of a country where my government has a horrendous history of provoking, and outright funding, violence in the Americas and Asia. We funded Cuba's Batista govt who were gangsters while Fidel Castro and thousands of others fought them in the 50s to gain independence. When they finally did and had public trials, some of our own country's CIA officers popped up. Once again, this is an embarrassment.
Sorry for going on and on, my point is that we should continue to disassociate ourselves from such atrocious people. It would be foolish to say all people in China support the terrible things that some people do there. It would be equally ignorant to say this of anyone in any country. You do bare responsibility, however, if you are aware of such things and do nothing. However, I get the sense that everyone up here is a fan of education.
Luckily, we can vote for new leaders (with varying success) and be sure to share our country's history. Also, if you were crazy enough, you could become one of these leaders yourself. I get the impression that changing policy in China is very difficult. Even worse, talking about subjects that cast the government there in a negative light comes with painful consequences.
It is highly regrettable when one must do that to government reports/research. One could so the same with the Warren Report looking at the Kennedy assassination based on what we know now about those events.
A CSU Alumnus from China, I am very glad to see your post. I greatly regret that I missed the meeting that this article is about with the CSSA. I am continually open to learning more. I have been shocked by what people have shared about their tumultuous experiences in other countries. Clearly, people in the US also have their fair share of stories.
When Pelosi talks about moral authority, there is defintely an appearance of her making grand claims about US moral authority. I strongly believe that anyone paying attention to politics and history realizes that no country's leaders could be said to have the greatest moral authority. If we were to measure something like level of moral authortiy, we would be more wise to look at people who have less power.
The United States has commited war crimes across the world. These have been committed by various goverment leaders through commands to our national security forces (armed services, FBI, CIA, etc.). Like China, we have had tremendous confusing periods of state apparatuses doing harm to the very people they are sworn to protect. The Civil Rights period, during which one of our most civil presidents was demonized (JFK) as well as some of the world's most impressive leaders and movements (Martin L King, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy, Fred Hampton, John Lennon, etc)-- is the most obvious example of the bizarre turning on it's own people that our leaders have commanded/encouraged our armed services, law enforcement, and propaganda arms to do. It is shameful. We must never forget these things and continue to encourage others to discourage others from ever believing such acts are worth commiting.
A CSU Alumnus from China, I find it difficult to be a citizen of a country where my government has a horrendous history of provoking, and outright funding, violence in the Americas and Asia. We funded Cuba's Batista govt who were gangsters while Fidel Castro and thousands of others fought them in the 50s to gain independence. When they finally did and had public trials, some of our own country's CIA officers popped up. Once again, this is an embarrassment.
Sorry for going on and on, my point is that we should continue to disassociate ourselves from such atrocious people. It would be foolish to say all people in China support the terrible things that some people do there. It would be equally ignorant to say this of anyone in any country. You do bare responsibility, however, if you are aware of such things and do nothing. However, I get the sense that everyone up here is a fan of education.
Luckily, we can vote for new leaders (with varying success) and be sure to share our country's history. Also, if you were crazy enough, you could become one of these leaders yourself. I get the impression that changing policy in China is very difficult. Even worse, talking about subjects that cast the government there in a negative light comes with painful consequences.
Craig Hawley
posted 5/04/08 @ 12:06 AM MST
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/hr_facts.html
feynmann
posted 5/17/08 @ 5:14 AM MST
Response to Dear Mr. Spencer Williams:
After carefully watching the so-called "Documentary" video of "Tank Man" (52 min long!), now I started to understand how and from where all those ideas in your mind were cranked out. Please first accept my deep sympathy - nothing personal but just straight to sheer facts, and I'm pretty sure you're a great person. Unfortunately it appears that all the education you received about China was from tank-man type of *edited* stories.
Following is my response in a bullet list style:
* Tank-man video intentionally has many distortions against the whole truth of the June 4th event: first, it cuts off the dialog event between protesting students and Chinese government. Secondly, it altered the order of event sequence. No! Tank-man event happened long BEFORE the June 4th of 1989. After 6/4 the martial law was shortly applied to Beijing, and I'm pretty sure tank-man would have no chance to even exist. Thirdly, it totally took off the pictures of riots and the terribly burnt bodies of soldiers. And again importantly, those young soldier kids were burnt long BEFORE the June 4th of 1989. As you admitted, control of riots is necessary for the functionality of a normal society. What could I expect from you if all your education resources were like Tank-man type of video? It is an arbitrarily edited and fabricated story - by the way, have you ever been to China? Please forgive my impatience.
* As to Mr. Xiao Qiang's statement, it's getting ironically silly. He wrote, "In November 1992, an oceanographer in Seattle called my office at Human Rights in China after finding a bottle that had been drifting across the Pacific Ocean for eleven years. A leaflet inside contained information about Wei Jingsheng, then China's most prominent political prisoner, who had been sentenced to fifteen years in prison in 1979. Until the contents of the bottle arrived on my desk in New York, the world had not heard anything about Wei since his sentencing." Really? Then how could I hear Wei Jingsheng's name during 1990-1991 summers when I spent time constantly listening to radio channel VOA (Voice of America)? Just skepticism surrounds this "leader"? A normal people's intelligence should feel insulted by this skepticism. Please forgive me again for my bluntness.
* Re: "in free democracies, there is room for dissent and action upon it without fear of being arrested, treated inhumanely in prison, publicly humiliated on national television, etc." - Unfortunately I've simply eye witnessed the whole event of Mr. Wen Ho Lee. My point here is not trying to point finger to anything. My two simple points here are: 1) I'm talking about Wen Ho Lee event not because someone else has *documented* "free opinions" to offer me to receive; 2) No government of any country is perfect and it's always easy to blame rather than to reconcile. Are we still trying to seek understanding in nowdays? You and I both know that misunderstanding is cheap.
I'm closing my discussion from now on. In any way I appreciate your discussion effort. Certainly you are free to take whatever opinions you want - my only final suggestion is, as to China's issue, there is a rational way rather than a blind way. Go see china yourself if you do want to talk about china!
After carefully watching the so-called "Documentary" video of "Tank Man" (52 min long!), now I started to understand how and from where all those ideas in your mind were cranked out. Please first accept my deep sympathy - nothing personal but just straight to sheer facts, and I'm pretty sure you're a great person. Unfortunately it appears that all the education you received about China was from tank-man type of *edited* stories.
Following is my response in a bullet list style:
* Tank-man video intentionally has many distortions against the whole truth of the June 4th event: first, it cuts off the dialog event between protesting students and Chinese government. Secondly, it altered the order of event sequence. No! Tank-man event happened long BEFORE the June 4th of 1989. After 6/4 the martial law was shortly applied to Beijing, and I'm pretty sure tank-man would have no chance to even exist. Thirdly, it totally took off the pictures of riots and the terribly burnt bodies of soldiers. And again importantly, those young soldier kids were burnt long BEFORE the June 4th of 1989. As you admitted, control of riots is necessary for the functionality of a normal society. What could I expect from you if all your education resources were like Tank-man type of video? It is an arbitrarily edited and fabricated story - by the way, have you ever been to China? Please forgive my impatience.
* As to Mr. Xiao Qiang's statement, it's getting ironically silly. He wrote, "In November 1992, an oceanographer in Seattle called my office at Human Rights in China after finding a bottle that had been drifting across the Pacific Ocean for eleven years. A leaflet inside contained information about Wei Jingsheng, then China's most prominent political prisoner, who had been sentenced to fifteen years in prison in 1979. Until the contents of the bottle arrived on my desk in New York, the world had not heard anything about Wei since his sentencing." Really? Then how could I hear Wei Jingsheng's name during 1990-1991 summers when I spent time constantly listening to radio channel VOA (Voice of America)? Just skepticism surrounds this "leader"? A normal people's intelligence should feel insulted by this skepticism. Please forgive me again for my bluntness.
* Re: "in free democracies, there is room for dissent and action upon it without fear of being arrested, treated inhumanely in prison, publicly humiliated on national television, etc." - Unfortunately I've simply eye witnessed the whole event of Mr. Wen Ho Lee. My point here is not trying to point finger to anything. My two simple points here are: 1) I'm talking about Wen Ho Lee event not because someone else has *documented* "free opinions" to offer me to receive; 2) No government of any country is perfect and it's always easy to blame rather than to reconcile. Are we still trying to seek understanding in nowdays? You and I both know that misunderstanding is cheap.
I'm closing my discussion from now on. In any way I appreciate your discussion effort. Certainly you are free to take whatever opinions you want - my only final suggestion is, as to China's issue, there is a rational way rather than a blind way. Go see china yourself if you do want to talk about china!
Spencer
posted 5/19/08 @ 6:19 PM MST
feynmann, I greatly appreciate your response. Don't worry about coming across crassly or bluntly. It is difficult to gauge mood and tone in responses like these at times. I encourage you to keep looking at responses up here and contributing, but there are other forums as well, of course. Regardless, I am very eager to learn about the massive events I have heard about and life in general in China. I will outright admit that there is much I have to learn. I have never visited China and would very much like to. I would just have to remember to not bring anything with me that even hints at state subversion. All that has been shared with me so far has been perplexing on the whole.
For instance, the Tank Man video has indeed gotten me interested in learning about what happened during the protests of 1989. With an event so complex, I suppose it's expected that information about it would be all over the place and sometimes very inconsistent.
It is crucial, and informative for me, that you mention how some of the protesters killed soldiers. People can easily loose their innocence in riots of such a scale. There are still accounts of those days I am ignorant of.
Bearing all this in mind however, the response of the Chinese government to all of the hoopla (which was initiated based on legitimate concerns of corruption) was WAY over the top. (Again, I don't mean to yell when I put things in caps, it's only from a lack of other formatting options to make things stand out). It does not seem that this grave issue is apparent to you. For example, earlier you had said:
"Tank-man event happened long BEFORE the June 4th of 1989. After 6/4 the martial law was shortly applied to Beijing, and I'm pretty sure tank-man would have no chance to even exist."
I will look into disputes about just when it was that the Tank Man did what he did. What upsets me here, though, is the second sentence, where you seem to imply that if the Tank Man was indeed outside, or anyone, during martial law in Beijing, they would have no chance to exist. I hope I'm reading this wrong: Are you saying you expect police to simply wipe people out when martial law is declared? Arrested, of course. Taken to jail, sure. But killed? Maybe in Wild West movies, or the USSR, or Burma/Myanmar, or North Korea, or China apparently.
Also, does the video stage the part where ambulance drivers drive up to help people and are shot at? I don't care where you're from, but if you are in an organization that tells you to shoot medical employees, particularly those trying to save peoples's lives, get out of there as soon as you can. There is also much other footage of indiscriminate violence of armed govt employees against unarmed civilians.
Control of riots, feynmann, IS necessary. By that, I did not mean that is always necessary to use lethal force in such cases. In fact you NEVER should unless your life is threatened. However, no matter whose footage you look at, unless it's on state sponsored news in the good country, people were killed unnecessarily, on both sides it seems. But it appears that the military completely overcompensated the number of deaths they were trying to revenge.
In reference to Wen Ho Lee in response to my comment about how dissent in free countries, ideally, does not lead to arrest, imprisonment, humiliation, etc., I too rely on other accounts in learning about his story. If you dive into this story, you will find that it is actually quite the humbling event for our justice system, in that people came out and admitted their mistakes in convicting this man.
Once again, when we compare allegations of dissent in China, this kind of happy ending is not as feasible, is it? First of all, if I wear a shirt that said Fuck the Government on campus, no one would care. Maybe some people would complain, but ultimately I wouldn't have to fear for my safety, unless some group of disagreeing people started harassing me. Even if they did, I could contact the appropriate authorities and be alright.
If you did that sort of thing in China, if you wore something that spoke ill of national policy, practiced a religion frowned upon by the state, went to Tibet and interviewed people without state guides, posted a blog about how much the leaders suck, I would have to expect trouble. And not trouble from a bunch of hoodlums who are uber-conservative, but by the uber-conservative gun-weilding state security apparatus. That is what I mean when I say that dissent in free societies is done without fear of these things. These are just simple basic rights, good sir, that of speaking your mind and having room to facilitate reform.
Sure the Chinese govt. do things differently, specifically more violently it appears and without regard for something called human rights which is not merely a catch phrase, but something that should be guaranteed to all people, not just Westerners. Human rights are not a centerpiece, it is not a decoration for a state society.
I hope to see change in the good country. The response to the earthquake was quite surprising and unbelievably sincere. People in the country could actually see their leaders. Foreign aid was let in with no ridiculous restrictions. The press were granted the kind of press freedom that news outlets need. Right on, I say. They surely kicked our embarrassing response to Katrina in the ass, and Burma's even more shameful one to their recent disaster. I hope the doors keep opening up.
For instance, the Tank Man video has indeed gotten me interested in learning about what happened during the protests of 1989. With an event so complex, I suppose it's expected that information about it would be all over the place and sometimes very inconsistent.
It is crucial, and informative for me, that you mention how some of the protesters killed soldiers. People can easily loose their innocence in riots of such a scale. There are still accounts of those days I am ignorant of.
Bearing all this in mind however, the response of the Chinese government to all of the hoopla (which was initiated based on legitimate concerns of corruption) was WAY over the top. (Again, I don't mean to yell when I put things in caps, it's only from a lack of other formatting options to make things stand out). It does not seem that this grave issue is apparent to you. For example, earlier you had said:
"Tank-man event happened long BEFORE the June 4th of 1989. After 6/4 the martial law was shortly applied to Beijing, and I'm pretty sure tank-man would have no chance to even exist."
I will look into disputes about just when it was that the Tank Man did what he did. What upsets me here, though, is the second sentence, where you seem to imply that if the Tank Man was indeed outside, or anyone, during martial law in Beijing, they would have no chance to exist. I hope I'm reading this wrong: Are you saying you expect police to simply wipe people out when martial law is declared? Arrested, of course. Taken to jail, sure. But killed? Maybe in Wild West movies, or the USSR, or Burma/Myanmar, or North Korea, or China apparently.
Also, does the video stage the part where ambulance drivers drive up to help people and are shot at? I don't care where you're from, but if you are in an organization that tells you to shoot medical employees, particularly those trying to save peoples's lives, get out of there as soon as you can. There is also much other footage of indiscriminate violence of armed govt employees against unarmed civilians.
Control of riots, feynmann, IS necessary. By that, I did not mean that is always necessary to use lethal force in such cases. In fact you NEVER should unless your life is threatened. However, no matter whose footage you look at, unless it's on state sponsored news in the good country, people were killed unnecessarily, on both sides it seems. But it appears that the military completely overcompensated the number of deaths they were trying to revenge.
In reference to Wen Ho Lee in response to my comment about how dissent in free countries, ideally, does not lead to arrest, imprisonment, humiliation, etc., I too rely on other accounts in learning about his story. If you dive into this story, you will find that it is actually quite the humbling event for our justice system, in that people came out and admitted their mistakes in convicting this man.
Once again, when we compare allegations of dissent in China, this kind of happy ending is not as feasible, is it? First of all, if I wear a shirt that said Fuck the Government on campus, no one would care. Maybe some people would complain, but ultimately I wouldn't have to fear for my safety, unless some group of disagreeing people started harassing me. Even if they did, I could contact the appropriate authorities and be alright.
If you did that sort of thing in China, if you wore something that spoke ill of national policy, practiced a religion frowned upon by the state, went to Tibet and interviewed people without state guides, posted a blog about how much the leaders suck, I would have to expect trouble. And not trouble from a bunch of hoodlums who are uber-conservative, but by the uber-conservative gun-weilding state security apparatus. That is what I mean when I say that dissent in free societies is done without fear of these things. These are just simple basic rights, good sir, that of speaking your mind and having room to facilitate reform.
Sure the Chinese govt. do things differently, specifically more violently it appears and without regard for something called human rights which is not merely a catch phrase, but something that should be guaranteed to all people, not just Westerners. Human rights are not a centerpiece, it is not a decoration for a state society.
I hope to see change in the good country. The response to the earthquake was quite surprising and unbelievably sincere. People in the country could actually see their leaders. Foreign aid was let in with no ridiculous restrictions. The press were granted the kind of press freedom that news outlets need. Right on, I say. They surely kicked our embarrassing response to Katrina in the ass, and Burma's even more shameful one to their recent disaster. I hope the doors keep opening up.
- Displaying 1 - 13 of 13
Peace Love
posted 5/01/08 @ 9:55 PM MST
Perhaps you could hold your open discussion forum in China.
Perhaps not.
I keep forgetting that China is held in slavery by a brutal totalitarian communist dictatorship that kills students for even thinking about open discussion.
Let the Games begin.