heres another story that is unfolding..via global voices
http://ethanzuckerman.com/haowu/ |
Too funny! Actually, this is getting ridiculous. Really. 10 years for online article is a great way to attract attention, but is a bit misleading, no? That's like saying Zacarias Moussaoui is facing a death sentence for learning how to fly planes. In reality, not too many governments will sit by idly when someone advocates its violent overthrow. That's true in the US, Europe and even China. |
Phillip , not sure on the contents of the SERP. For sure the results returned fior "Chinese name (吴皓)" is on the top ten.. but is it pointing to the right content on the censered person or not ?? Maybe someone can see if
http://beijingorbust.blogspot.com/ is visiable or not in .cn ??
wrt to your posting.. yes it is indeed a sad thing that a person gets 10 yrs for "dissendent speech"- I wonder what would have happened if MLK " I have a dream " speech was termed as 'dissendent' and if he was put away for 10 yrs
KJ:" not too many governments will sit by idly when someone advocates its violent overthrow." not really sure what you mean by this ?? I think the online article did not represent "counterrevolutionary and
state security crimes" per sec..theres a big difference between opinions of speech and lilteral counterrevolutionary activity!!
|
Not sure I would feel too secure publishing an article like that about the US government these days...
|
From the Human Rights in China web site:
"According to his indictment, Ren was detained because of an essay disseminated on the Internet called “The Road to Democracy” (Minzhu zhi lu), in which he expressed the opinion that the people have the right to overthrow tyranny by violent means."
I haven't read the article, but clearly the inference is that "tyranny" refers to the CCP, and not some hypothetical tyranny in the abstract. Now, how is advocating the violent overthrow of the government not "counterrevolutionary"?
As for MLK, this is what he said in his speech, "In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence."
In others words, he advocated nonviolence as a means to confront injustice, not the violent overthrow of the US government. So, please don't confuse MLK with Ren. They are not the same person and they do not carry the same message. |
KJ, I did not read his essay.
But if usage of the word "tyranny" clearly points to the communist party then certainly, by your logic, the communist party are indeed tyrants. And how can it be wrong to fight tyrants? Sophie Scholl during Nazi-Germany also promoted (in her case: non-violent) opposition against the regime. She ended up being guiliotined by the Nazis.
Does it make it OK because others do it?
Or do you say the communist party are not Nazis? That's a too strong comparison? Well, I don't know about that. According to some sources, Mao Zedong killed millons of people during his "cultural revolution." I don't know – maybe a lot of things changed.
So, KJ, it would help clarifiy your side of the discussion if you tell us whether or not you think Ren is going to be imprisoned rightfully or not. If you think not, then you must be complaining about the lack of reporting of similar cases in Europe (and the US). If so what are those cases in Europe you are talking about? I'm interested. |
KJ: both Gandhi and Madela also advocated for freedoms. both spoke their voices out. Their theories led and stired voilence at the grass root level. The analogy of what I was trying to pinpoint on my previous posting was simple- countries and government seem to look at freedom of speech differently.
Yesn I woulds like to retierate philipps qus: is what happend is right or Wrong ?? |
Just because someone in China gets jailed, it doesn't make him MLK, Gandhi or Mandela.
This is not a freedom of speech issue. If Ren was Ron in the US or Ralf in Germany, and he authored an online manifesto calling for the overthrow of the US or German governments, I'll bet that the respective internal security forces will pay him a nice visit. Without reading Ren's actual essay, I cannot say whether his imprisonment is right or wrong, but I'll leave you this.
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002385----000-.html
So, if the Human Rights in China web site accurately described Ren's essay, then if Ren was an American and had written the same about the US government, he would face up to 20 years in prison. So, 10 years isn't looking too harsh at this point. I'm all for more freedom, but I don't want some kook calling for the overthrow of the US government. And, I'm sure many people in China may feel the same way about Ren. |
It's nice to see these well written, thought out and researched points.. I'd like to read the article if I can find it ;) Can someone send a link?
Also, read this blurb from the US Declaration of independence. This document is very special to me and it's just full of language we might find controversial today..
(http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration_transcript.html)
************
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...(skipped some stuff here)..That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. (Just read the entire thing.. click on the link http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration_transcript.html. It's beautiful!!!
********* |
> If Ren was Ron in the US or Ralf in Germany, and
> he authored an online manifesto calling for
> the overthrow of the US or German
> governments, I'll bet that the respective internal
> security forces will pay him a nice visit.
No, I do not think that if a Ralf in Germany in 2006 writes online that tyranny may be even ended by violent means, that Ralf would end up in prison for 10 years. Again it may help if you cite real cases and not theoretical ones. It's likely that every country in the world has laws against "overthrowing the state," but it becomes a matter of proportions. To say very little and to end up in jail for very long, for example, is completely out of proportion. Added to that, you have to consider how justified the gov't is in what it's doing, i.e. how moral it is acting itself. If in Nazi-Germany someone promotes overthrowing the gov't, I'll say it's completely justified and moral. Is it lawful? No, certainly the Nazis had the laws tweaked to their own liking... but that's not the point really. |
"Just because someone in China gets jailed, it doesn't make him MLK, Gandhi or Mandela."
Why not ?? what is stoppin us ??
imho-- Anyone who is fighting a fair fight and fo a just cause cerainly needs to be elevated to such a podium -regardless of where they fight or which government they fight against!!
|
Philipp Lenssen said:
---
Or do you say the communist party are not Nazis? That's a too strong comparison? Well, I don't know about that. According to some sources, Mao Zedong killed millons of people during his "cultural revolution." I don't know – maybe a lot of things changed.
---
You are right, Mao Zedong did kill millions of people, but you also completely ignore how completely things have changed since then. The chinese govenment is nowhere near nazis.
What whas wrong with nazis/japanese militarists in the first place?
1) They had explicit goal to kill millions of people, for various reasons (wrong race, wrong place of birth, too many people, etc)
2) The society they created was very un-even, if you are not aryan/japanese – you are slave or dead.
During cultural revolution in china, (1) and (2) was definitely present (everyone who is not communist should either become one or/and suffer the consequences). This was nearly as bad as in Nazi case.
Now, the communist doctrine of china changed so much it can be hardly considered communist anymore. Chinese people have private property on production means, can freely leave their country, can work wherever they like, etc.
I don't understand why these days China is considered more evil, then, say, Russia – at least in china you get convicted according to certain existing laws, and not for something that was legal when you did it (keyword: Khodorkovsky)
There are two ways to make things better – gradualy change or destroy everything and build anew. China has taken the former route, and it appears to be much more sucsessful then fighting civil war instead.
Sincerely,
Konstantin Levinski
PS Putting people to jail for a webpage is horrible, there is no doubt about it, but I believe this is echo of the past, and will disappear as the society becomes more prosperous and stable.
|
