80 killed in Tibet, Chinese will be kept in the dark

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

you should really ask china to remove the word dictatorship from it's constitution, 'democratic' dictatorship doesn't change the fact that it is a dictatorship. They even call it a dictatorship. you're jumping through some serious hoops here.

wes

PSI wrote: »

So again, I'm asking Wes to either show that China's government is a dictatorship as he stated, or retract.

Ok, there a "democratic dictatorship" then. Which makes no sense whatsoever.

Oh and here is the definition of democracy:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

Main Entry:
de·moc·ra·cy Listen to the pronunciation of democracy
Pronunciation:
\di-ˈmä-krə-sē\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural de·moc·ra·cies
Etymology:
Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos + -kratia -cracy
Date:
1576

1 a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

2: a political unit that has a democratic government

3capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy— C. M. Roberts>

4: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority

5: the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

Care to explain how China is in anyway democratic as per the definition above? From what I can see is that power is invested in the party as opposed to the people. They say they have the best interests of the populace in mind, but the people don't seem to have much of a say in how there governed.

fly_agaric

wes wrote:

Care to explain how China is in anyway democratic as per the definition above? From what I can see is that power is invested in the party as opposed to the people. They say they have the best interests of the populace in mind, but the people don't seem to have much of a say in how there governed.

Reminds me of another poster here who insisted about Iran's special form of "democracy" when inexact terminology was used (calling Iran a theocracy)... it seems terminology does matter a lot and the old "democratic" brand is largely untarnished even after the past few years.

edanto

A democratic dictatorship?! What a bullsh1t line.

It's easier to judge the Chinese government on their actions instead of what they say about themselves. I'll use the story in the Times today to judge the actions of the state.

carsonsunhao, what do you have to say about this piece of news - that about 1,000 paramilitary police were involved in an operation to enter a monastery and confiscate pictures of the Dali Lama. That got the crowd angry and it got ugly.

And at least 8 people were shot by the Chinese army (AKA paramilitary police). What kind of crackpot regime will kill people that are standing up for their right to have pictures of whoever they want?

Maybe China isn't a dictatorship - maybe there isn't a word to describe the kind of cartel that runs the place. It's fucked what they're doing over there. Killing people, shutting down access to Tibet, ruling with fear and violence. Stopping journalists from entering Tibet - and only allowing events to be reported under censorship. None of that is consistent with generally accepted democratic practises.

Anyone remember this picture? What does it evoke in you? What memories, what news stories, what feelings?

Young people in China don't give it any meaning - they don't know anything about that chapter of their history. Nothing happened on June 4th 1989 in Tiananmen square, according to the official version.

When interviewed about it, some of them just said 'it's a guy in front of a tank... so what?' (from Tankman) In Orwellian style, control of history gives control of the present. Discussing politics on the web in China is enough to have you disappeared.

I would argue that makes China more of totalitarian state than anything else.

fly_agaric

keiran wrote: »

I also remember that China launched a moon explorer last year.But none of the media in Europe talked about it. WHY

Maybe because they all hate China? They are all involved in a big conspiracy? Or perhaps they did report it but it didn't displace news about, maybe, Europe for one thing, from the front pages?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/oct/24/china.usa

http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn12973-china-releases-moon-missions-first-image.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4146226.stm

http://avantgo.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2726632.ece

even on RTE's website...

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1024/chinamoon.html

I'm sure others can find European non-English language News web pages if they are willing to search.

wes

fly_agaric wrote: »

Reminds me of another poster here who insisted about Iran's special form of "democracy" when inexact terminology was used (calling Iran a theocracy)... it seems terminology does matter a lot and the old "democratic" brand is largely untarnished even after the past few years.

2 completely different countries, systems and situations and it has nothing to do with this thread. I will however admit I was very wrong about the Iranian system, as recent events have shown, it is hopelessly broken.

GuanYin

wes wrote: »

Care to explain how China is in anyway democratic as per the definition above? From what I can see is that power is invested in the party as opposed to the people. They say they have the best interests of the populace in mind, but the people don't seem to have much of a say in how there governed.

Care to explain how it meets the definition of dictatorship?

You see, you can't have it both ways. You can't pick and choose which words you want to take literally to suit your arguement.

The wording is "democratic dictatorship" - if you're going to state as fact that China is a dictatorship, I want to see some level of proof for your arguement. Your very next post needs to clarify, I won't ask again.


In truth, China is neither a democracy nor a dictatorship. The nature of the PRC makes it more of a constitutional monarchy, with each leader preceding the next from the same clan, but without any individual holding absolute power over the state.

The term dictatorship explains China's sometimes response to uprising and dissent, but there is no Chinese dictator, hence there cannot be a dictatorship.

As I said, I expect clarification. I'm all for people condemning China, I would love to see a multi-party government with free speach, but making stuff up isn't on and from here on in, there will be bans - specifically I'm talking to Wes.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

why on earth should he have to define it as a dictatorship when THEY define themselves as a dictatorship. Should he have to find evidence that the pope believes in the weekly divinity of crackers?

GuanYin

Mordeth wrote: »

why on earth should he have to define it as a dictatorship when THEY define themselves as a dictatorship. Should he have to find evidence that the pope believes in the weekly divinity of crackers?

Democratic dictatorship and dictatorship are not the same thing. Whatever about the terminology, the actual behavior of the Chinese government, while totalitarian, is not that of a dictatorship.

Incidently, my warning goes to the other side of the debate too. I don't see propaganda sites or partisan groups as a source of any type of "fact". Images and media fine, but I don't think they prove anything.

leninbenjamin

PSI wrote: »

The wording is "democratic dictatorship" - if you're going to state as fact that China is a dictatorship, I want to see some level of proof for your arguement. Your very next post needs to clarify, I won't ask again.

i'm sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever. i have a guitar. i also have an electric guitar. but the electric guitar is still a guitar, i'm not trying to argue it becomes a completely different entity entirely. for you to be saying a democratic dictatorship isn't a dictatorship makes absolutely no sense. it's a particular type of dictatorship. that's how English works. we have nouns, but we can also distinguish between nouns using adjectives. the adjective however doesn't override the noun though...

wikipedia wrote:

A dictatorship is an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by a dictator.

this was my understanding of dictatorship. note that it doesn't specify the "dictator" is an individual, it might also be construed as an entity; rather like a government?

it might also be worth pointing out that a dictatorship doesn't mean fascist. a fascist dictatorship would surely be a subcategory of dictatorship, just like your democratic dictatorship. from reading your posts you seem to be mixing them up?

GuanYin

leninbenjamin wrote: »

it might also be worth pointing out that a dictatorship doesn't mean fascist. a fascist dictatorship would surely be a subcategory of dictatorship, just like your democratic dictatorship. from reading your posts you seem to be mixing them up?

No thats a fair point. My assumption from wes's post (mainly because he didn't reference the Chinese constitution before) was that he was claiming it was a facist dictatorship, as in the common word usage of the term.

SkepticOne

It might be fairest to call the PRC an authoritarian dictatorship since fascism has particulular historical connotations.

carsonsunhao

edanto wrote: »

A democratic dictatorship?! What a bullsh1t line.

It's easier to judge the Chinese government on their actions instead of what they say about themselves. I'll use the story in the Times today to judge the actions of the state.



And at least 8 people were shot by the Chinese army (AKA paramilitary police). What kind of crackpot regime will kill people that are standing up for their right to have pictures of whoever they want?

Maybe China isn't a dictatorship - maybe there isn't a word to describe the kind of cartel that runs the place. It's fucked what they're doing over there. Killing people, shutting down access to Tibet, ruling with fear and violence. Stopping journalists from entering Tibet - and only allowing events to be reported under censorship. None of that is consistent with generally accepted democratic practises.

Anyone remember this picture? What does it evoke in you? What memories, what news stories, what feelings?

Young people in China don't give it any meaning - they don't know anything about that chapter of their history. Nothing happened on June 4th 1989 in Tiananmen square, according to the official version.

When interviewed about it, some of them just said 'it's a guy in front of a tank... so what?' (from Tankman) In Orwellian style, control of history gives control of the present. Discussing politics on the web in China is enough to have you disappeared.

I would argue that makes China more of totalitarian state than anything else.

note,'you people in china don't give it any meaning???they didn't know anything about that charpter of your history????' you seems hold a doctor degree of the morden chinese history, otherwide, similar to your mother lanaguage suppose to be irish, you are not qualified to judge us in such way. cos you should relise the importance of the word 'motherland' meaning no one could never ever break it apart!!!!

yes, the culture revolution was a unhappy time, however we should allow people to make mistakes as none of leader in this world is bettet than others , what's more, do relise that we are heading to a new generation so that such issues should not be mentioned again and again, cos china is not 100% comunisim anymore. however is there any country china has invaded????don't get me wrong buddy. therefore you negtively agreed that after the culture revolution until nowadays, we have spent only 30years to achived same effort that western countries did in 100years. the best regime ever suits 1.3 billion people. so dont be ignorant. that relate to a too big issue that i don't think you wanna spent your entire life to study.

similar to this tibet issue, i am talking about western media distortion, if neither of you has agreed with those'cropped pictures' on the anti-cnn website as their regular way to report china, i would be more intersted in wes view as a result of damage, however, I do concern about the bias is directing more ordinary irish people in a wrong way to raise against china, note! we think of these people as anti-china flies.

RedPlanet

When Britian shed crocodile tears over Tibetan protestors one should remember how irish protesters were treated when they agitated for succession and for civil rights.

wes

PSI wrote: »

No thats a fair point. My assumption from wes's post (mainly because he didn't reference the Chinese constitution before) was that he was claiming it was a facist dictatorship, as in the common word usage of the term.

I never mentioned fascism. Apologies, I was unaware that dictatorship = fascism to a lot of people.

I taught it was well excepted that China was a dictatorship. Fair enough, I retract my claim of it being a dictatorship. I except that there a democratic dictatorship.

wes

carsonsunhao wrote: »

however is there any country china has invaded????

1979: China invades Vietnam

China's War with India

leonardo4358

wes wrote: »

1979: China invades Vietnam

China's War with India

This two wars are border conflicts, not invasion. They are wars intended to safeguard sovereignth, but not occupation. See China won both wars but withdrew their forces immediately afterwards.

wes

leonardo4358 wrote: »

This two wars are border conflicts, not invasion. They are wars intended to safeguard sovereignth, but not occupation. See China won both wars but withdrew their forces immediately afterwards.

Invasions were apart of the wars. The Chinese army invaded both countries. I never made claims of a occupation.

Anyway, the question by carsonsunhao, was that:

carsonsunhao wrote: »

however is there any country china has invaded????

Those 2 were clearly invasions. Your correct they were not occupations, but that wasn't the question posed. Neither was the right or wrong of the wars either asked, just whether or not China has ever invaded anyone, which they have.

carsonsunhao

leonardo4358 wrote: »

This two wars are border conflicts, not invasion. They are wars intended to safeguard sovereignth, but not occupation. See China won both wars but withdrew their forces immediately afterwards.

wes, you should study the definations between then, think before making a common. i believe you have a brain.

edanto

carsonsunhao wrote: »

note,'you people in china don't give it any meaning???they didn't know anything about that charpter of your history????' you seems hold a doctor degree of the morden chinese history, otherwide, similar to your mother lanaguage suppose to be irish, you are not qualified to judge us in such way. cos you should relise the importance of the word 'motherland' that no one could ever ever break it apart!!!!

yes, the culture revolution was a unhappy time, however we should allow people to make mistakes as none of leader in this world is bettet than others , what's more, do relise that we are heading to a new generation so that such issues should not be mentioned again and again, cos china is not 100% comunisim anymore. however is there any country china has invaded????don't get me wrong buddy. therefore you negtively agreed that after the culture revolution until nowadays, we have spent only 30years to achived same effort that western countries did in 100years. the best regime ever suits 1.3 billion people. so dont be ignorant. that relate to a too big issue that i don't think you wanna spent your entire life to study.

similar to this tibet issue, i am talking about western media distortion, if neither of you has agreed with those'cropped pictures' on the anti-cnn website as their regular way to report china, i would be more intersted in wes view as a result of damage, however, I do concern about the bias is directing more ordinary irish people in a wrong way to raise against china, note! we think of these people as anti-china flies.

carsonsunhao

OK, let's go. We're just two strangers on the internet. How can we find out what the Chinese people think, know or feel about June 4th? Can I ask for your help, please.

I'll tell you what I have so far. One documentary in which American journalists interviewed Chinese students, and well, I put a lot of trust in the channel that made it. At the same time, PBS have made at least one spectacular factual feck-up in terms of the retelling of the American role in the Vietnam regime control war with a previous documentary, so their record is not exemplary. But the tankman documentary made the point that young Chinese aren't conscious of the Massacre of 1989 and you seem to be disputing this point.

What are your experiences, would you say that most people you know in China know about the people that died and disappeared? What is taught at schools about that day?

I just had a look through your posts on boards to see what you were into and they've all been about China in the past few weeks. Welcome to boards and I hope that you've been finding people friendly enough around here. Obviously there's loads of people interested in this story and not a lot of Chinese people that are prepared to talk about it online.

Do you know of any discussion forums like this in China? Obviously there would be a language barrier, but there might be a way around that!

I completely agree with you how it's good that the living standards in the big cities have increased in affluent areas, and of course yes, the population boom, well that's just great - the government seem to be doing a good job of the pile of money that they've 'lent' to the US - but I've heard stories of wealth distribution in China being very unequal and well, I find it next to impossible to get information about Chinese statistics or blog reports. Can you help please?

GuanYin

carsonsunhao, there is no need to make personal comments on this forum. Next time you will be officially repremanded.

Guys, I do feel this has moved away from the actual topic of Tibet and more towards a kind of China bashing that is not helpful in trying to understand the main point.

So I ask a question. The main motivated group in the free Tibet campaign are Lama Monks and ardent followers of the Lama. The Chinese AND the Western media seem to indicate this (although maybe not specifically state this).

As the Lama are a religious and political group, with the most to gain, does this compromise their standing? I mean, they ran the theocracy in Tibet in the absence of Chinese rule which was basically a serfdom that exploited the common Tibetan. They used religious premise to achieve this.

In the absence of evidence of dissatisfaction among the average Tibetan (and you can theorise all you like about this, but the fact is, there is no evidence that anyone outside the Lama influence is dissatisfied) what distinguishes the Lama inspired trouble we see now, from any partition or even terrorist actions elsewhere?

Can a former theocracy with political motive really be painted as representing a people who have benefited since they were overthrown?

carsonsunhao

edanto wrote: »

carsonsunhao

OK, let's go. We're just two strangers on the internet. How can we find out what the Chinese people think, know or feel about June 4th? Can I ask for your help, please.

Hi Buddy, thanks for your kindly words, sure i am willing to tell as a ordinary chinese. although I know I wouldnt be able to change anyone's mind towads to any 'human right' issue here from my previous experience.

all chinese bloggers has been totally exasperated by this western media distortion. when the riot begins at the time, when innocent people getting robbed and killed, how dare the media mentioning' china send army out and crackdown the peaceful protest?' don't you think criminals must be broght to justice? and for all the damages that made to both tibetan and chinese. how dare you report like this????

http://aysmcq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pXUkHxY4nI063OlIQHqoQj-lVl3yF9lbRFmYq47BS_q25A7KGe4NO35q7e8EcdNFXpz_LhoMGRGEDEl1ezPXzKw?PARTNER=WRITER

The fact is that, we have been keeping silence about this western media distortion issue for a long long time, proberly get use to it as time being, however, in this case, as tibet riot has been largely reported with lies, we are totally exasperated and finally start to fight back, the protest against western media bias has been organised all arourd the world by oversea students and will be held in dublin as well on this coming saturday. the video clip on youtube' tibet was, is and always part of china has been viewed for more than 2million times. on the web, any article that relate to tibet riot with comment box underside, will be engaged by angry chinese people's reply etc, no matter what lanaguage it is.

that is the justicial voice from entire china, and should not be ignored in this nice democratic country. I mean if you really think we chinese have no human right or speech of freedom at all. however, can any regime survive from this? the answer is absolutly NO!

a lot of people criticize china in their own country, eventhough they knows nothing but talks like an expert. pick up a article somewhere as a 'proof'. I simply asked myself a question before 'do I really know about ireland's history'? then what do you think if we chinese states media report ireland this way? you will not happy too! In this case, I do concern about the bias gonna turn more ordinary irish people to be anti-china. as I had shockly seen enough here. therefore, I decided to register myself and I do feel like i have to fight against this distorion as well.

fly_agaric

wes wrote: »

2 completely different countries, systems and situations and it has nothing to do with this thread. I will however admit I was very wrong about the Iranian system, as recent events have shown, it is hopelessly broken.

Offtopic - wes - I didn't have you in mind and wasn't having a go at you there. I was actually thinking of InFront (PSI reminded me of his posts).
Either my memory fails me (possible, probable even) or this sort of terminology issue re Iran's system of govt has come up in several threads.

Thirdfox

carsonsunhao wrote: »

Hi Buddy, thanks for your kindly words, sure i am willing to tell as a ordinary chinese. although I know I wouldnt be able to change anyone's mind towads to any 'human right' issue here from my previous experience.

all chinese bloggers has been totally exasperated by this western media distortion. when the riot begins at the time, when innocent people getting robbed and killed, how dare the media mentioning' china send army out and crackdown the peaceful protest?' don't you think criminals must be broght to justice? and for all the damages that made to both tibetan and chinese. how dare you report like this????

http://aysmcq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pXUkHxY4nI063OlIQHqoQj-lVl3yF9lbRFmYq47BS_q25A7KGe4NO35q7e8EcdNFXpz_LhoMGRGEDEl1ezPXzKw?PARTNER=WRITER

The fact is that, we have been keeping silence about this western media distortion issue for a long long time, proberly get use to it as time being, however, in this case, as tibet riot has been largely reported with lies, we are totally exasperated and finally start to fight back, the protest against western media bias has been organised all arourd the world by oversea students and will be held in dublin as well on this coming saturday. the video clip on youtube' tibet was, is and always part of china has been viewed for more than 2million times. on the web, any article that relate to tibet riot with comment box underside, will be engaged by angry chinese people's reply etc, no matter what lanaguage it is.

that is the justicial voice from entire china, and should not be ignored in this nice democratic country. I mean if you really think we chinese have no human right or speech of freedom at all. however, can any regime survive from this? the answer is absolutly NO!

a lot of people criticize china in their own country, eventhough they knows nothing but talks like an expert. pick up a article somewhere as a 'proof'. I simply asked myself a question before 'do I really know about ireland's history'? then what do you think if we chinese states media report ireland this way? you will not happy too! In this case, I do concern about the bias gonna make more ordinary irish people being anti-china. as I had shockly seen enough here. therefore, I decided registed myself and I do feel like i have to fight against this distorion as well.

I wish you good luck on the demonstration this coming weekend - may I remind you that protest should always be peaceful and civil.

I probably will be there to document the event (unofficially and perhaps for the college newspaper).

GuanYin

fly_agaric wrote: »

Offtopic - wes - I didn't have you in mind and wasn't having a go at you there. I was actually thinking of InFront (PSI reminded me of his posts).
Either my memory fails me (possible, probable even) or this sort of terminology issue re Iran's system of govt has come up in several threads.

Well you know, the terms exist for a reason. I for one look at the level of democracy in Ireland and the UK and compare it to the US and know that although all the countries are "democratic" it isn't the same flavour of democracy. It might not matter to you, but from my point of view it does.

Regarding Theocracies, different types of dictatorships, Constitutional Monarchies, Monarchies etc, I think the definition does count in terms of how the people are treated.

The freedoms that exist in China, do not in any way exist in North Korea (recently people were executed for trying to flee across the border - if you're going to kill them, why not just let them go?). To use the term dictatorship as carelessly as wes did in his post, is really an insult and disservice to what the North Koreans are suffering.

If you're going to use terms for government in a politics forum. You want to be accurate in your terms.

carsonsunhao

Thirdfox wrote: »

I wish you good luck on the demonstration this coming weekend - may I remind you that protest should always be peaceful and civil.

I probably will be there to document the event (unofficially and perhaps for the college newspaper).

you are warmly welcomed buddy and somehow, we will show those anti-china flies how to protest by the real meaning of peacefully.
myself graduated from UCD and I wish you are from there too. see you at GPO 2pm:)

carsonsunhao

edanto wrote: »

carsonsunhao

But the tankman documentary made the point that young Chinese aren't conscious of the Massacre of 1989 and you seem to be disputing this point.

I find it next to impossible to get information about Chinese statistics or blog reports. Can you help please?

sorry buddy, I could not reply you step by step. cos that relate to a too big issue which worth a lifetime to in-deep study.

1, I heard the story from my family members eg mum and dad simple like that, and by the time when i was little, however, I could still remember the news from TV as well, I did agree that it was a tragic story and surelly an unhappy time.

2 just search from google such as anti-cnn or tibet infomation war, or go on to youtube find out 'tibet was, is and will always be a part of china' by searching the word 'tibet'. then just read the replies. or go on to the website anti-cnn.com. however, the english forum is not as popular as chinese, but still well contains some fact.

here are some of the links http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2008/03/anti-cnn-the-me.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo&feature=related

yawtin

They only reported the violence from Tibetans after they interviewed western tourists. However, they predetermined that it was going to be a Tiananmen type uprise.

They showed in the LOndon relay that there were many "free tibet" protests, but they never showed any thing about the biggest demostration that day:

Chinese protest in London you never see on BBC
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X8cuVFuwKbk

We will have our own protest on 12 April 2008, 2-5pm, in front of GPO. You are welcome to come and talk to us.

Bubs101

I don't think that the western media is distorted as such, more that it's selected journalism because one protest is much bigger than the other. For example with the video that Yawtin posted, of course most Chinese want the Olympics to happen, it will improve the image of the country and probably the lives of the people there but as for the Chinese protesting against the western media, I find that funny. The reason that Yawtin's video didn't appear on youtube is it's not newsworthy and your protest on the 12th probably won't be either.

Also, Carson, I'm assuming you are talking about the video with the pictures and text? Here are just a few problems with that.

There are alot of ridiculous claims that aren't backed up at all. British treating them as slaves for one (TBH, if you are hinting that China has a better humanitarian record than us it's a joke) and the Dalai Lama's puppet regime.

Also, it's quite clear that a Chinese man created that video. It's nothing but ridiculous propaganda which takes advantage of the fact that we can't tell the difference between a Tibetan and a Chineseman in photos

SkepticOne

yawtin wrote: »

They only reported the violence from Tibetans after they interviewed western tourists. However, they predetermined that it was going to be a Tiananmen type uprise.

They showed in the LOndon relay that there were many "free tibet" protests, but they never showed any thing about the biggest demostration that day:

Chinese protest in London you never see on BBC
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X8cuVFuwKbk

We will have our own protest on 12 April 2008, 2-5pm, in front of GPO. You are welcome to come and talk to us.

I watched a fair bit of the live coverage on the BBC and it did show the pro-Chinese protests. It did not get the same level of coverage as the Tibet protesters because the pro-China group weren't as spread out along the route and there wasn't a group interfering with the torch procession itself.