Everything's all right now in China...

Seth Brundle · 26-05-2008 9:23pm #1

http://www.breakingnews.ie/text/world/mhgbmhojidey/

Parents whose only child was killed or maimed in China’s earthquake will be allowed to have another, officials who administer the country’s one-child policy said today.

A certificate will be issued to affected parents allowing them to have another child, he Chengdu Population and Family Planning Committee in Sichuan province said.

I'm lost for words!

Manic Moran · 27-05-2008 3:01am

You would submit that they shouldn't be allowed to?

NTM

Seth Brundle · 27-05-2008 8:29am

I think its terrible that something like that rule is in place.
However, to come out a week after their kids have been killed and give permission to the parents to replace the child smacks of insensitivity.

seamus · 27-05-2008 9:28am

kbannon wrote: »

However, to come out a week after their kids have been killed and give permission to the parents to replace the child smacks of insensitivity.

Ah, I'm not entirely sure. I've never been over there, but there may be different attitudes to the whole thing, because of the "one child" rule.
Since they had to say this, I imagine that in normal circumstances, if your child dies, tough ****. They probably imagined entire towns, childless and aging and decided that allowing them to have another child would bring some sort of solace to their grief.

It's not like the Chinese government are known for compassion in any case

BelieveYourself · 27-05-2008 9:41am

Earthquake is a natual disaster. It's a common sense. Chinese government shouldn't be a target for that.

I hope you won't be 'brainwash' like Sharon Stone:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcRiAytaD6w

Fratton Fred · 27-05-2008 10:32am

What's the problem? The biggest problem this world has is over population, the Chinese are doing something about it.

This tragedy has killed thousands of children, the government are doing the right thing otherwise villages would lose a whole generation.

eoin5 · 27-05-2008 1:54pm

I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

SeanW · 27-05-2008 3:26pm

BelieveYourself wrote: »

Earthquake is a natual disaster. It's a common sense. Chinese government shouldn't be a target for that.

I hope you won't be 'brainwash' like Sharon Stone:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcRiAytaD6w

I'm no fan of the Chinese Communist government either but ... that's just screwed up. Of course Hollywood is known for being something of a reality-free zone.

humberklog · 27-05-2008 3:49pm

I can only see compassion in it. They aren't known for bending the rules often so anytime they do is a good sign surely. It's a pretty quick decision too for a notoriously slow acting and beaurocratic system of government. I'd say the decision will give a lot of solace to those that have lost a child and had considered their personal legacy gone.

mike65 · 27-05-2008 3:54pm

I think the move actualy shows some enlightenment I wasn't expecting to be honest.

Sharon Stone should spend more time looking hot and less thinking "the Dali Lama is a good friend of mine". Yeah right.

Mike.

sink · 27-05-2008 4:53pm

The one child policy is neccessary, and it's a decision that could never have been made in a democracy. If the Chinese continued to have large families with 5-6 children, the world population would be well ove 7.5 billion by now. The chinese themselves would be poor as they ever were and economic progress would be alot slower.

I base my arguments on these facts.
- The chinese family typically had 4 or more children before one child policy
- The parents and the state would have struggled to feed and educate the massive number of children
- This would have made it impossible for the country to pull itself out of poverty as fast as it is now doing.

murphaph · 27-05-2008 7:40pm

Is the chinese population decreasing though? If we accept that the entire population has one child exactly then the population should halve every generation. Is it?

eoin5 · 27-05-2008 7:46pm

murphaph wrote: »

Is the chinese population decreasing though? If we accept that the entire population has one child exactly then the population should halve every generation. Is it?

I'd say its a tough law to enforce but a big factor is that the standard of living has increased so people are living longer too.

humberklog · 27-05-2008 8:49pm

murphaph wrote: »

Is the chinese population decreasing though? If we accept that the entire population has one child exactly then the population should halve every generation. Is it?

On simple math yeah but I don't think it's as simple as that. Apparently the law varies in how strict it's enforced from province to province. Also there's a lot of variations such as some provinces allow a 2nd child if the first is a girl or disabled and also some provinces allow a couple who themselves are the result of this policy to have 2 children. I think they're sticking with the one child policy for another few years. It does sound harsh and I'm sure there are a lot of cases where it has been very harsh on individuals. However they do have a lotta lotta people and before its introduction famine and disease were common enough. It was brought in as a response to a problem. But yeah it does sound tough. Still and all it is good to see the authorities showing heart (and swiftly too) in this instance.

28-05-2008 1:33am

sink wrote: »

The one child policy is neccessary, and it's a decision that could never have been made in a democracy. If the Chinese continued to have large families with 5-6 children, the world population would be well ove 7.5 billion by now. The chinese themselves would be poor as they ever were and economic progress would be alot slower.

I base my arguments on these facts.
- The chinese family typically had 4 or more children before one child policy
- The parents and the state would have struggled to feed and educate the massive number of children
- This would have made it impossible for the country to pull itself out of poverty as fast as it is now doing.

I believe this is true. Although I would disagree that the poorest people would be "as poor as ever." They'd probably be starving. The Chinese government, as bad as they can be, implemented this because it was necessary. Not because they are "evil" or anything like that.

In a few years they will have a fairly old population and will have less young people propping up the elderly as opposed to somewhere like India which will have the worlds largest population. But compare their economy to India. They will simply have larger incomes amongst a smaller population which in turn will work out better for the Chinese population as a whole.

LostinBlanch · 28-05-2008 10:49am

humberklog wrote: »

On simple math yeah but I don't think it's as simple as that. Apparently the law varies in how strict it's enforced from province to province. Also there's a lot of variations such as some provinces allow a 2nd child if the first is a girl or disabled and also some provinces allow a couple who themselves are the result of this policy to have 2 children.

This is true AFAIK it's not a blanket one child policy nationwide. Also various ethnic groups within China have leeway in regard to this.

CtrlSource · 28-05-2008 1:52pm

Speaking of Sharon Stone, this from BBC News:

Anger over star's quake remarks

Actress Sharon Stone has sparked criticism in China after claiming the recent earthquake could have been the result of bad "karma". The US star, speaking at the Cannes Film Festival, linked the recent disaster to Beijing's policy on Tibet.

She said: "I thought, 'Is that karma?' When you are not nice, bad things happen to you." But Stone added she "cried" after the Tibetan Foundation asked her to help quake victims.

Stone, 50, said: "They wanted to go and be helpful, and that made me cry.

It was a big lesson to me that sometimes you have to learn to put your head down and be of service even to people who aren't nice to you."

Stone made her comments last week in a brief interview with a Hong Kong film crew.

"I'm not happy about the way the Chinese are treating the Tibetans because I don't think anyone should be unkind to anyone else," Stone said in footage widely available on the internet.

"And then all this earthquake and all this stuff happened, and I thought, is that karma?"

Ng See-Yuen, founder of the UME Cineplex chain and the chairman of the Federation of Hong Kong Filmmakers, called Stone's comments "inappropriate". According to a story in trade magazine Hollywood Reporter, he vowed not to show Stone's films in his theatres.

Film boycott

UME has branches in Beijing, Shanghai, Chongqing, Hangzhou and Guangzhou, China's biggest urban movie markets. Stone's comments also created a swell of anger on the internet, including at least one Chinese website devoted solely to disparaging her comments.

The Beijing Times also reported that some major Beijing department stores had removed advertisements for cosmetic and couture giant Christian Dior, which feature Stone's image. The earthquake struck south-west China on 12 May, leaving 68,109 people dead, with another 19,851 still missing.

i don't agree with her musings about karma. However, several times recently, when i've heard praise for the Chinese official response to the quake from places like the UN and other international bodies, my cynical inner voice has started murmuring about how this really suits Chinese government efforts to appear more 'touchy-feely' ahead of the Olympics. Why are bigwigs in officialdom so quick to praise domestic efforts to help the victims, when this is only what any civilised government should be doing anyway? Please note, i'm not criticising the NGOs or aid workers who who should be praised, just the lauding of the official government response.

BelieveYourself · 28-05-2008 2:34pm

CtrlSource wrote: »

Speaking of Sharon Stone, this from BBC News:

i don't agree with her musings about karma. However, several times recently, when i've heard praise for the Chinese official response to the quake from places like the UN and other international bodies, my cynical inner voice has started murmuring about how this really suits Chinese government efforts to appear more 'touchy-feely' ahead of the Olympics. Why are bigwigs in officialdom so quick to praise domestic efforts to help the victims, when this is only what any civilised government should be doing anyway? Please note, i'm not criticising the NGOs or aid workers who who should be praised, just the lauding of the official government response.

Because Chinese government is dealing with 68,109 people dead, with another 19,851 still missing. (more than 2% Irish population)

Again, earthquake is a natural disaster. Anyone who has half brain won’t link it with Olympics, communist, one child policy and Tibet.

turgon · 28-05-2008 3:56pm

No offense to anybody at all, I'm just saying that this is probably exactly what the communists wanted to happed. Give them a chance to be nice and all humanitarian, especially after the Tibet issues. I hope that doesn't cause offense to anyone, its just the way I see it. I fully sympathize with all those affected in China, and Burma.

humberklog · 28-05-2008 5:32pm

turgon wrote: »

No offense to anybody at all, I'm just saying that this is probably exactly what the communists wanted to happed. Give them a chance to be nice and all humanitarian, especially after the Tibet issues. I hope that doesn't cause offense to anyone, its just the way I see it. I fully sympathize with all those affected in China, and Burma.

Surely accusing the chinese government doing something for P.R reasons is refreshing. Like anything one does in life it needs practice. If this is a start for china showing detemined social responsibilty towards its own community...well hey, let the good P.R roll. What else does a government do? Doubted when they do..Damned if they don't? If they reacted the way they have done in the past this thread would have a very different tinge to it. I think it's far better to show no cynacism to good deeds that way the next time heart is called for it has an easier more open passage.
I disagree that the chinese govenment wanted this to happen. That's far, far too cynical for my imagination to comprehend. Could be a me thing but looking at the chinese busy themselves...I don't think so.

CtrlSource · 28-05-2008 6:51pm

Likewise, i don't believe this awful natural disaster and tragedy was wanted by anyone. But that's not to say that the Chinese can't in some ways get PR mileage out of their handling of it. BTW, i’m not suggesting that they are insincere in their response either.

Alas, it's far too early in their 'good deeds' history for me to start awarding brownie points, when one looks at their long track record of human rights issues & abuses. i have a lot of time and respect for Chinese and know them to be good and decent people, but i don't agree with their style of government and the way that their country is run

leninbenjamin · 28-05-2008 7:55pm

CtrlSource wrote: »

Why are bigwigs in officialdom so quick to praise domestic efforts to help the victims, when this is only what any civilised government should be doing anyway?

consider Katrina, and the almost non reaction reaction from the most civilized nation in the west. The Chinese response was fantastic and and from what i can was possibly the best co-ordinated response to a natural disaster in a long time. they have every right to appear praising of the rescue efforts. frankly they deserve every bit of good publicity they get out of this.

Burko · 29-05-2008 9:23am

In times past....and even in some remote regions today, the child might be killed or sold if it was disabled or female.
Only a son can take care of the family in traditional Chinese society, a daughter would have to devote herself to the family of her husband.

This is why if your child dies and you are Han, special consessions might be made if you intend to have another child.....at least one that would be given a birth cert...and thus, an education and all that follows.

The scarcastic title of this thread "Everything's all right now in China..." only shows your own lack of understanding of the situation I'm afraid.
Not that I have a problem with that, there is no reason you should know this.

All I'm saying is don't be so quick to judge....people (even party officals) are just as human in China as they are in Ireland.

Burko · 29-05-2008 9:56am

Ok, I realize now that I've left myself wide open by saying they are human but they also kill and sell kids.
I'm going to explain myself rather than just edit it.

I was referring to a practice that took place in some of the most far-from-civilization regions in the country and thus..on earth.

Humans are brutal creatures, we all know that. We're the same animals now that we were ten thousand years ago.
Take away all the rules, guidlines, morals and education brought by civilisation and we are the same now as we were then.

Rules like not being alowed to have another child after one has died are there to help people....all I'm saying.

CtrlSource · 29-05-2008 11:19am

leninbenjamin wrote: »

consider Katrina, and the almost non reaction reaction from the most civilized nation in the west. The Chinese response was fantastic and and from what i can was possibly the best co-ordinated response to a natural disaster in a long time. they have every right to appear praising of the rescue efforts. frankly they deserve every bit of good publicity they get out of this.

The USA is "the most civilized nation in the west"? Come on! i love America, have spent time there and would certainly not mind going back and spending more, but i don't consider it to be as you describe!

i think the official Chinese response has been positive and appears swift, but i still don't see why they should be held-up as shining lights to the rest of us when they're not

BelieveYourself · 29-05-2008 11:27am

CtrlSource wrote: »

but i still don't see why they should be held-up as shining lights to the rest of us when they're not

Why do you think it's an issue they got some shining lights what they deserved? What's your suggestion then?

CtrlSource · 29-05-2008 11:55am

It's an issue because it plays nicely for the Chinese government / Communist Party. i'm not questioning the motives of the Chinese in mounting their rescue efforts. i'm not saying that they're not sincere in wanting to help the people who have been affected by this tragedy.

All i'm pointing out is that this really suits the Chinese government efforts to appear more 'touchy-feely' ahead of the Olympics, after all the protests about Tibet and so on...

Thumpette · 29-05-2008 11:59am

CtrlSource wrote: »

It's an issue because it plays nicely for the Chinese government / Communist Party. i'm not questioning the motives of the Chinese in mounting their rescue efforts. i'm not saying that they're not sincere in wanting to help the people who have been affected by this tragedy.

All i'm pointing out is that this really suits the Chinese government efforts to appear more 'touchy-feely' ahead of the Olympics, after all the protests about Tibet and so on...

I reckon you are dead right- obviously not suggesting it was either hoped for or insincerely handled.

But it has been a very well run PR excercise in publisising their speedy reaction.

BelieveYourself · 29-05-2008 1:59pm

CtrlSource wrote: »

Speaking of Sharon Stone, this from BBC News:
when this is only what any civilised government should be doing anyway?

Thumpette wrote: »

I reckon you are dead right- obviously not suggesting it was either hoped for or insincerely handled.

But it has been a very well run PR excercise in publisising their speedy reaction.

Why Chinese government is doing that any civilised government should be doing becomes a PR excercise?

I wish Chinese government can go on this 'PR' since earthquake injures and missings really need this 'PR campaign'.

Burko · 29-05-2008 3:42pm

CtrlSource wrote: »

It's an issue because it plays nicely for the Chinese government / Communist Party. i'm not questioning the motives of the Chinese in mounting their rescue efforts. i'm not saying that they're not sincere in wanting to help the people who have been affected by this tragedy.

All i'm pointing out is that this really suits the Chinese government efforts to appear more 'touchy-feely' ahead of the Olympics, after all the protests about Tibet and so on...

I agree it plays nicely.....but why exactly is that an issue?
Are there rules regarding these kinds of situations that other countries follow?

Is there a government that wouldn't milk it?....I mean obviously most wouldn't be as obvious but subtlety isn't a strong point of the Chinese.

Seth Brundle · 29-05-2008 11:00pm

leninbenjamin wrote: »

consider Katrina, and the almost non reaction reaction from the most civilized nation in the west.

The USA is nowhere near as civilised as it likes to believe!

Burko wrote: »

The scarcastic title of this thread "Everything's all right now in China..." only shows your own lack of understanding of the situation I'm afraid.
Not that I have a problem with that, there is no reason you should know this.

I'm aware of the situation in China.
My reasoning for the thread title was that I find it a little insensitive of the Chinese Government come out and effectively say "OK your kid is dead but listen, you can go and have another to replace them"
People are burying their children and yes, maybe some people were concerned about their family line, old age, etc. but somehow I felt that this would not be their primary thoughts at the moment - maybe in a few weeks but not now!
Furhtermore, there are suggestions that the high child fatality rate is down to substandard school construction. (Allegedly) had the government ensured that their own standards were being enforced, then less kids would need to be replaced by grieving parents!

Everything's all right now in China...

Comments