text:
Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.
"On one local document seen by Ms Birney, cadres in one township could score only up to 10% of their points for lawfulness, but 40% for economic development. In effect, she says, the party is instructing local officials to break laws when it will help them to meet higher priorities."
The argument is unbelievably weak.
It's like to say that US political system assigns 100% of points for getting elected, 0% of points for persnal integrity of keeping one's words. So in effect, US political system is instructing Obama to lie about supporting gay marriage when it will help him to win election, as it was in 2008 instructing Obama to lie about closing Guatanamo when it would help him to win election...
'It's like to say that US political system assigns 100% of points for getting elected, 0% of points for persnal integrity of keeping one's words.'
No it's not. In a democracy the number of votes a candidate gets IS how many points he or she is awarded. And unlike in an oligarchy you are unlikely to be awarded points for destroying the lives of anyone the rulers consider inconvenient (or 'unharmonious').
You are wrong. US political system is not a parliamentary system, in 2008 US did not get 54% Obama administration and 45% Mccain one.
It is a unbelievable 'giant leap forward' from 'assigning less importance to law and order' to 'as if instructing officials to break the law'. I'm sure when DNC looked at candidate Clinton it must have assigned less importance to his minor personal character flaws than to his high electability. But can you say that 'DNC is instructing Clinton to insert a cigar in a WH intern's vagina'?!
'You are wrong. US political system is not a parliamentary system, in 2008 US did not get 54% Obama administration and 45% Mccain one.'
I didn't say that it was a parliamentary system. I am fully aware that it is a presidential system. Both types of system are, however, democratic, which is what is important.
'But can you say that 'DNC is instructing Clinton to insert a cigar in a WH intern's vagina'?!'
You don't have to be president to insert a cigar in someone's vagina (feel free to try it yourself if you can find a willing partner).
You do have to be an official (or bribe one) to destroy the lives of all who oppose you and your industrialist friend's pursuit of profit. (I'm sorry, but you can't try this unless you have a CCP appointed position).
I used to live in China but I am not Chinese.
Every single thing that I read about China on the economist is in line with what I saw when I lived there for three years.
I thank god that I was not born there and that I had the opportunity to leave whenever I wanted.
How can anyone pursue happiness either in the government or outside it when the powers that be work like this? I am so glad that China has no soft power or trend starting momentum and that my home country is never likely to adapt any aspect of its politics.
You guys do not know China at all. If you had experienced the life in China with all your heart, you'll find it a pretty nice place to live in and the people there are kind, the environment there is good.
You are just failed foreigner in China, talk to the successful expatriates in China and you will know how happy they are in China. To feel happy you should go to India, Philipines, Bhutan etc.
Interesting that you say that. I do charters for rich very successful expats that live in Beijing and Shanghai. They are all there only for the money and cannot wait to get out. The biggest complaint: pollution that is taking years off their lives. Just last week one of them was telling me that Beijing is worse than before the Olympics now.
Pollution is bad but money is good. Their choice.
I am Chinese and I have liven here for 23 years. I had no opportunity to leave whenever I wanted. Once I thought different counties have different problems. but now I think our problem is more serious.
Every country has their own set of problems. China, given the size of its population, and its hunger for quick development, is facing a lot of pressing challenges, which makes the situation far more serious than in developed countries. They are not doing that bad, given the problems they face.
However I do agree, in terms of place to live, China (apart from some great scenic spots tht you are happy to see on vacation), is certainly NOT a nice place. And yes, most expats come for the money (or just for a job) and cope with the killing pollution, and a few other inconveniences, until they finally go back, as they are the lucky ones with a choice (and the rich Chinese).
Right now ,people can do nothing to the goverment's "maintaing stability" issue,even this is how the human rights been abused.
On the other hand,most Chines don't care about human rights as much as western,especially in a downturn ecomomic environment,the priority is making a living!
I think the problem is not about whether we Chinese care about human rights or not. Undeniably, the rate of people who have high education in China is not as much as those in Western countries. Most of time, those Chinese who suffer from unfair treatment just do not know how to fight for their rights and they are used to compliance.
Meanwhile, in oriental culture, few content concerning about human rights. when you guys are critical about the Chinese government and its law. Tell us a way out of this.
Chinese has a complicated situation with big population and many minorities. Stability and development's being our first concern right now has its reasons.
"Human right" is a western method to get politic gain from other countries. If Human Right is so important for the Americans , there will not be Guantanamo prisoners.
Do you know how Chinese people exposed their anger to "bad" western products? They smashed this bad product in front of their head quarter, filmed the procedure and put it in the net! Brave and I like it.
I have no doubt you like smashing things. But why is it brave? They are not putting themselves in any danger. In fact the CCP often encourages protests with an anti-foreign or nationalistic element so as to distract attention from their own failings. The people who are really brave are those who are standing up to the CCP and the companies run or owned by CCP members. They are putting themselves in real danger!
See how one-sided thinking you had--Everything chinese people react were CPC failure.
Even western media in Germany mentioned these cases, not finger-pointing to CPC, but to the lack of canal for consumers for complaint. And German reportage also mentioned, Chinese people take foreign products as high quality products so they don't mind to pay more for that. But the products were not as good as they promised, but the company ignored their complain. They have to do such extreme action to draw attention. It works perfectly. At least the German producer has to look into the cases and make customers happy. CEO has to apologize! They take it seriously.
I should wrote "Bravo" not brave!
By the way, I've never seen anyone defend Guantanamo Bay on this website. Nevertheless it is one small detainment camp currently containing less than 200 detainees. The reason it is (rightly) criticised is that the prisoners are not afforded basic rights which people believe they should be afforded.
There are one and a half million prisoners in China. Even the ones who are guilty of committing a crime under Chinese law are unlikely to have been convicted after the application of due process (again according to Chinese law). There are many more who are innocent of any crime and who are incarcerated on the whim of the CCP, often as a 'punishment' for trying to improve the lives of other Chinese people. Long periods of detainment outside of the court system, torture in extracting 'confessions', and ill-treatment of detainees are normal procedure.
And yet you don't see Chinese people protesting on the street about this (as you see Americans protesting about the presence of 200 detainees in Guantanamo Bay). This is no doubt because Chinese poeple don't want to be detained (illegally) themselves.
Perhaps you should ask some of those detained in China if they would like to have their human rights respected before you start saying that 'human rights' are some kind of western plot.
I didn't say '[e]verthing Chinese people react were CPC failure'. My point is that people are allowed (and encouraged) to protest about foreign products and the actions of foreign states (they should be allowed, but not encouraged). They are not allowed to do the same when it comes to the CCP and CCP linked companies' products. This is a deliberate effort by the CCP to channel discontent (mainly of CCP making) away from the CCP itself and into nationalistic and anti-foreign feeling.
They are not allowed to do the same when it comes to the CCP and CCP linked companies' products.
You are wrong, they do it for local products too if they think it is not worth the money. And they are doing it not because of anti-western, because of their admired God-liked-western-products are not as "saint" as they said-to-be. They don't hammer a Lamborghini for fun, they really have anger.
Why Guantanamo prison is still there when it was wrong, why can let them free. It is because of selfishness, afraid of revenge from those prisoners ! You should grant them all greencard and one million dollars each (at least) so they can live in the states. It is your shit and clean it by yourself, don't give them to European countries.
'You are wrong, they do it for local products too if they think it is not worth the money.'
I did not say that there are no protests about local products. I said that Chinese people are not allowed do the same (as they do in the case of defective non-local products), and I am not wrong. Protests related to foreign states and companies are not restricted (they are often encouraged) to anything like the extent that protests related to the CCP and CCP linked companies are. Also, the former are often given significant media attention, whereas the latter are not (remind me who controls the media in China).
I disapprove of Guantanamo Bay. I disapprove of the Chinese 'penal system' more, and I have explained why. We are aware that you disapprove of the former, but if you do not disapprove of the latter I can only conclude that as far as you are concerned Guantanamo Bay is simply a stick for you to beat America with, and that you have no real concern for the detainees or their rights.
That were not protest, but rather expression of anger. That is a different. You always said protest, it is NOT. It is expression of ANGER!!! Like what I did now.
You are wrong it is singlely incident by individual, not encourage by any CPC officials. Put down your colour glasses on this matter.
Guantanamo Bay is simply a stick for me and human right and democracy are your sticks. It is a wonderful world.
It is funny the holy human right protecter can't even protect its own human right image.
Disapprove is no use, Guantanamo prison is still there forever until they die. I beg...
'That were not protest, but rather expression of anger.'
A public expression of anger designed to draw attention to itself and aimed at a particular multinational corporation IS most certainly a protest.
'You are wrong it is singlely incident by individual, not encourage by any CCP officials.'
Firstly, a single person can protest alone. Secondly, maybe you're right that the particular protest you have in mind was not encouraged by any CCP officials (although I doubt you can know this for a fact). I never said all protests related to foreign entities were encouraged by the CCP. The fact is that many are however (the anti-Japanese protests related to the 2010 Diaoyu Islands incident were largely organised by CCP student groups within the universities).
'Guantanamo Bay is simply a stick for me and human right and democracy are your sticks. It is a wonderful world.'
You are half right. Guantanamo Bay is a stick for you. You are not motivated by concern for those detained but by a hatred of America. Human rights and democracy are not a stick for me. They are a genuine means to improve the world and protect the citizens of all countries from their governments and from powerful corporations. That is why they can be referred to in discussing abuses in any country (not just one country I happen to dislike).
'It is funny the holy human right protecter can't even protect its own human right image.'
What makes you think I'm American? Even if I were, however, I could disagree with my government's actions. Shame it is so difficult (and dangerous) to do this in some countries (e.g. China).
'Disapprove is no use,'
In a democracy the disapproval of the government by the citizens can bring about significant change. Maybe 'disapprove is of no use' where you come from.
'Guantanamo prison is still there forever until they die.'
About 800 people have been detained in Guantanamo Bay in total. Of those detainees 600 have been released. In short, you do not know what you are talking about.
That is your imagination, not mine.
Now you twisted to politic affairs like "2010 Diaoyu Islands" and we are talking civil affair like hammering a Lamborghini for example.
You are wrong I dislike American government, not America or American.
You doesn't mean directly YOU personally, it means only generally western. So don't sit on seat which is not for you.
Disapprove is no use, Guantanamo prison is still there. Republican and Democrate are the same. No US government will dare to release the Guantanamo prisoners in the states. They will force (soft and hard) other nations to accept those prisoners. Or they will die there. I Beg !! And one Guantanamo prisoner is too much for America !! Shame !!
'That is your imagination, not mine.'
Since you give no indication what you are referring to here I cannot respond.
'Now you twisted to politic affairs like "2010 Diaoyu Islands" and we are talking civil affair like hammering a Lamborghini for example.'
So you admit the protests were encouraged by the CCP. That's a start. Hammering a Lamborghini is also political by the way.
'You are wrong I dislike American government, not America or American.'
So you recognise they are not the same thing. If you could do the same for China that would improve your vision significantly.
'You doesn't mean directly YOU personally, it means only generally western. So don't sit on seat which is not for you.'
So the entire west is responsible for what America does? If you don't tell me what 'you' means (in your head) how am I supposed to know?
'And one Guantanamo prisoner is too much for America !! Shame !!'
I agree. But it's better than the 1.5 million prisoners (with an equal lack of rights) in China.
Are you brother of Bismarck, you guys really like to put words to people's mouth.
Do you mean 'directly YOU personally', or 'generally western', or something else entirely when you use the word 'you'?
Is "brother" means "generally western" to you here ?
Every letter is english I guess. :D
BTW your brother Bismarck's english understanding is better than you.
'BTW your brother Bismarck's english understanding is better than you.'
We're lovers actually.
So you sometimes visit him in his coffin ? You smoke together!
He has been exhumed.
The article and a lot of the comments regarding this matter totally forgot about the facts that 1) it was the CCP that ressurected China from shame and weakness 2) China already has 1.3 - 1.5 BILLION people 3) The ultra ill treatment of Chinese in the past is still vivid in people's mind. Hence the westerners could never get China right.
"it was the CCP that ressurected China from shame and weakness"
yes into pride and repression.
"The ultra ill treatment of Chinese in the past is still vivid in people's mind"
Yeah, 1949-1976 was really, really bad.
1850 to 1976 was really, really bad.
Well if you're a peasant, it's probably more "beginning of time to 2000ish" was pretty bad. But I can agree with that.
I think this is a really good system. Its only weakness is in how the scoring is done. Otherwise this sort of government, especially on the local level seems to me to be much better than the kind where the scoring is done by pretty subjective factors such as voter popularity which sometimes or oftentimes translate to the politician's height or photogenic qualities or his ability to bring home some pork barrel spending.
The key problem with scoring is that the score looks at a single dimension, for instance growth or stability. Anyone can achieve good growth numbers if he or she is allowed to ignore the environmental impact or worker safety. But what good is that kind of growth? High levels of "stability" can definitely be achieved by imposing a 24 hour curfew with electronic spying on every man, woman and child. But what's that good for? Why not score on a ratio? For instance, can we maximise growth per carbon unit consumed subject to some minimum level?
Daveycool Daveycool, what is wrong with you? Why shouldn't scoring be done on good looks. As a person as stunningly good looking as yourself, why shouldn't people be judged by their looks. Its the whole reason why you exist. Even in China people are judged by their looks, if not, then why do Chinese leaders die their hair black? Also note the article on plastic surgery. You have betrayed all photogenic people in this world.
As for pork barrel spending, why shouldn't they be judged on it, its what local voters see. In China, local spend enormous amounts of money bribing central government officials in Beijing for project approvals etc.
Bismarck Bismarck, can't you see? You've answered the question yourself. I am constantly judged purely on my devatatingly good looks. It takes most people a long time after first meeting me to realise that my IQ is off the charts. I am god-like in the brains department. In fact, when God made man in his own image he made one with his sort of brains... me.
Anyway, I can definitively tell you that most people don't have the mental capacity to understand my level of geniusness. But that is still not the problem. They see me and think every good-looking person has the same smarts as I have. THey are badly mistaken. There is only one of me.
Pork barrel spending may be what the people want and it may be fine to the extent that the country can afford it. There is of course a limit as well to giving what people want. What happens when people want all the benefits without paying for it in taxes? What if people want others to pay for their plastic surgery in the hopes of getting brainy like daveycool?
bismarck, bismarck, why do you have to louse up every good soup on TE with your droppings?
Yeah, like Chongqing. Had it not been for Wang Lijun running to the Americans and squealing like a tween at a Bieber concert, the fiasco would have continued. Pork Barrel spending happens everywhere, whether in authoritarian / democratic country. In America pork barrel spending (ie Federal level) is small, because the discretionary budget of the US government is minuscule.
Getting back to your good looks, the world is just and given you a Aphrodite like case of vanity and self absorption. You spend 3 hours a day admiring yourself in the mirror.
Are you not awed by Daveycool's good looks. Have I said anything to offed the sensibility of the easily offended Chinese readers.
no, you are not guilty there. but what has that got to do with your dropping on good soups?
and how come you are not awed by my good looks, after all, the SOP of my neighbours' stopping their baby cries is by comforting them that 'kommonsenses' is coming if they don't stop crying, and it worked like a charm every time.
Bismarck Bismarck you are just a jealous type and Jewish defender.
Getting back to your looks, the world is just and given you a Aphrodite like case of vanity and self absorption. You spend 3 hours a day admiring yourself in the mirror.
But you spend 24 hours in the forum a day, and hate your looking every day and night. Jealous !!
"Yeah, like Chongqing. Had it not been for Wang Lijun running to the Americans and squealing like a tween at a Bieber concert, the fiasco would have continued."
What does that have to do with a scoring system for politicians that's (to me) more objective? Again, obfuscating is a poor substitute for rational thinking. Perhaps you have confused high scores with being above the law. If so, where have I said they are equivalent?
"In America pork barrel spending (ie Federal level) is small, because the discretionary budget of the US government is minuscule."
And this makes pork barrel a good substitute for actually doing productive things for your constituents? Pork barrel benefits a very small group of people (perhaps a single construction company) at the expense of an entire nation, if done in enough volume.
I was being sarcastic, when I mentioned Chongqing. Bo Xilai loaded the place with pork. He sent US$ 1 Billion on Gingko trees. I was not obfuscating, you just did not catch it. No one knew about it until Wang Lijun went to the Consulate.
"I was being sarcastic, when I mentioned Chongqing. Bo Xilai loaded the place with pork. He sent US$ 1 Billion on Gingko trees. I was not obfuscating, you just did not catch it. No one knew about it until Wang Lijun went to the Consulate."
And when he was found to have broken the law or aided in the breaking of the law, he was basically sacked. Pork or no pork. And if the pork he brought in was not noticed by anyone until Wang Lijun went to the consulate, it's really ineffective. What's the point of it? To benefit the tree grower?
It isn't that I didn't notice it -- that's not the point -- it's just irrelelvant to the idea that scoring forces some objectivity into the system. Scoring doesn't stop a politician from committing a crime, it doesn't stop him from bringing home some pork, what it does is ask the question "what have you done for your constituents?". And if the objective is to stop pork, it can be an item in the scoring as well. At the end of the day, you're confused when, again, you bring in a largely obscure bit of rrelevant trivia and pretend that it has a key effect on the issue being discussed. It's obfuscating things basically.
Let's get back to the concept of scoring. Why don't you do with politicians like they do with business. Give them a bonus if the economy grows above a certain %. Like 0.01% of the GDP, which is couple of billion dollars a year. But at the end of day, most business are shareholder democracies, and hard objective figures are main way of determining performance, but there are other considerations.
However, Government is not like business. Scoring performance of general administrators / politicians in Government has always been tricky. Its not as easy as ranking the performance of an head of road construction in government bureaucracy etc. This type of scoring was done so with disastrous results during the Great Leap Forward, reports of yield of 40-50 tones of rice a hectare were the norm.
At the end of the day, China is a one party democracy. Those scoring indicators are measurements that help decision makers determine whether a guy gets promoted or not. Its not a be all and end all. Secondly, the people who record those figures are really underpaid and are apt to "exaggerate", particularly at the county level.
The CPC leaders in their infinite wisdom, know that there is more to promoting some one than just cold hard figures (particularly if they have been massaged a great deal). They have 50-60 years of institutional memory of people fudging figures. If it was that easy, do you think the people at the Organization Department of the CPC would get paid the big bucks selecting Cadres based on puffed up stats.
Of course for you, it would be easy. Being the personality magnet that you are, you will always attract people of the best quality in terms of intelligence, drive, looks and character. They will line up at the door to work for you, even for FREE !! They can't resist.
"This type of scoring was done so with disastrous results during the Great Leap Forward, reports of yield of 40-50 tones of rice a hectare were the norm."
It's not the scoring that's the problem it's the lack of objective scoring mechanism. You get a bunch of students to grade themselves what do you think will happen? You take a bunch of teachers grading their own students, and their bonuses are based on their students' scores, what will happen? In the US, public school teachers oppose basing their evaluation based on their students' scores because of just what you cited. But that's narrowly foused on what COULD go wrong. Did they have a better alternative than faith-based factors on how to promote and retain the teaching staff?
But exaggerations and people gaming the system doesn't render the system worse than others where people don't even have objective criteria to make judgments. The great leap debacle had many silly things going on. Worse of which are unachieveable, fairy tale, goals given the state of the economy. You just need to build in safeguards to prevent r reduce gaming of the ssytem.
So what's your better system?
IF you are so concerned about objective criteria, assessment. Just feed everything to a computer and calculate based on all the criteria, and then have the computer spit out a Candidate.
The way I look at the Chinese system, which the Economist does not really cover in depth, is it establish a minimum level of competency. To be frank most of the Chinese bureaucrats are not the best of the best, if it was such a nice position, why do most of the princlings end up in the private sector. They do a good job of getting decent candidates and avoid hiring idiots.
You just take it at face value what the Economist says actually happens. In the CPC, Job performance (criteria) / qualifications are minimum qualifications, they get you in the door, but they won't determine whether you get the job or not. You won't get good looking idiots, but you won't have exceptional people. Here is an interesting study that explains how local governments work, the corruption, kickbacks, favored government departments etc.
When a post opens up, cadres apply. They look at job performance, qualifications, and pick a couple of people who meet qualifications. After that its really because a question of connections, out right bribery etc as to who finally gets the position. Is that not like how most companies pick people for a job (outside the bribery thing). That is how nearly all civil servant positions are filled in the West are they not.
Both the CPC and Western democracy select people based on criteria both impartial and subjective, the difference really is not the criteria used. You are going to get a supposedly better result with a Chinese cadre who spent 5-6 hours thinking who he should pick for Party chief (its still a democracy mind you, you just don't see it), and hurried voter who makes up his or her mind in half hour, this is particularly true in local elections. What's going on in both people's mind could be subjective / objective, the only difference is the Cadre could have actually meet the Party Chief, where as the voter did not. He has more information, both subjective/objective to make a decision. Is it any more subjective / objective difficult to tell.
The current repressive system is succeeding only because the emperor and his cronies have successfully used its propaganda machine to distract most of its people by dazzling (Olympics, World Expo, space exploration etc.) and external threat (funding from NED, the challenge of territorial sovereignty by Philippines/Vietnam etc.). But the repeated holes that appear in this propaganda machine by internet tools and more people-to-people contacts between Chinese nationals and the outside world are making things harder for the emperor. Afterall, the emperor fears its own people more than any of the outside enemies. Lets see how this drama ends.
Insightful! and very true. I would like to add a few points. The current system is cracking from within, as the BO scandal has revealed. However, the system is far from collapsing. The regime comprises about 400 million people out of the 1.4 billion population, and the 400 million people either directly or indirectly benefit from the regime, who are either directly employed by the regime or are family members and relatives of those who work for the regime. As long as the organised minority are able to remain functional, the rest of the population have no way of change their fate (provide social mobility is virtually nonexistent in China), no matter how angry they are. Besides, most of the population remain ignorant, apathetical, and fearful.
The current system is succeeding because it successfully delivering high economic growth, personal security, and social stability. The propaganda machine certainly helps, but people care more about their new purchasing power than far away things like space exploration. Most people in China have no idea what NED is.
Increasing labor costs and internal debt will make things harder for the Emperor. People-to-people contact will not.
"provide social mobility is virtually nonexistent in China"
This is utter crap. I've never found any statistical information on social mobility in China, so we basically need to rely on anecodotal information; but the fact that China's middle class is rapidly growing is obvious proof of social mobility. Anecdotally, I know many people who have risen out of poverty and into the middle class (or higher) by virtue of educational attainment and wise investment without any involvement of the Party.
Thanks for your response. I agree with most of what you say except that the people-to-people contacts have indeed changed the minds of a few Chinese and trends suggest that their numbers will grow. Although you are right...more immediate concern for the emperor is the economy.
Well sure, and I think more than that the fact that hundreds of millions of Chinese people watch Hollywood movies (readily and freely available on the internet with Chinese subtitles) should also have an impact.
But yet, almost strangely, the government is completely unconcerned by this. Instead the government makes English a mandatory part of school curriculums and in Shenzhen even hires hundreds of foreign teachers every year to teach English and expose children to western culture in public schools.
Taking into Chinese situation for consideration, I hold the view that the author of this article is narrow minded and extreme. According to the One Child Policy, if a woman who has already had one child tries to get the second child, then local officials have the right to force her to abort her child. In addition, Mr. Chen was arrested because of his behavior of inciting violence and destorying public facilities, not because of his speech. To be objective, I consider the way of the local authorities to handle the problem is not so sane and proper. I wish our government could pay more attention to the education rather than the punishment.
What happens when a mother-to-be discovers she is carrying twins or triplets?
It doesn't matter because it is decided by the God.It is allowed.However, if you already have a child and you want to more,it is illegal.
One Child Policy: A mother is only permitted to give birth once in her lifetime if she is successful on her operation. If the operation fails and she still has no child, then she will have another chance until she really has a child.
Its not allowed by Chinese Law
Well, if "God" decided a woman has twins, then God also decided another woman has a second child.
To abort that second child is to go against God's decision.
God doesn't decide how many babies a woman to have, it is the husband, husband's responsibility to have birth control too. He should take precaution when having sex with wife.
God has nothing to say, only the church want more believers. The bibles were written by human being.
Your opinion seems more persuasive and powerful to Hibro's viewpoint.I like it.
Well, in that case you have to consider retracting your own post that twin-births are "decided by the God."
Without a man how can God decided for a twin-births. And don't tell me man made by God, I am not Christian.
There exists a line between protesting, fighting for human right and breaking laws. Mr. Chen opposed forced abortion. That was fine. However, what Economist did not mention is that Mr. Chen organized a big protest and destroyed many public facilities. I wonder if burning down a bank in the West during a protest is legal or not. If not, then one should not think it is legal in China. Chen was arrested because of his behavior of inciting violence and destorying public facilities, not because of his speech. Clearly Economist mixed different facts to give readers wrong information. By the way, FORCED ABORTION is NOT ILLEGAL in China. If a woman who has already had one child tries to get the second child, then local officials have the right to force her to abort her child. This is not an issue of human right, but an issue of cultural difference.
" FORCED ABORTION is NOT ILLEGAL in China. If a woman who has already had one child tries to get the second child, then local officials have the right to force her to abort her child. This is not an issue of human right, but an issue of cultural difference."
Well said. This is exactly what I was telling the woman when I forcibly inserted the forceps into her vagina to rip out her unapproved spawn: "You have no rights as an individual human, so shut up and respect the culture of China."
"This is not an issue of human right, but an issue of cultural difference."
Well, NOPE. Culturally and historically, Chinese families typically had many children, the more the merrier.
Chinese Emperors never issued One-Child Policy edicts ;-)
Forced Abortion is illegal in China, you need to read the law. Its not a cultural difference. Either you are ignorant or trying to save face. Abortion was illegal in China until 1953. Secondly, up until 1979, China did not have any form of birth control policy. In fact they wanted people to have more Children !!! Abortion was almost unheard of before the One Child Policy. If a married Chinese woman said I want to abort her child before the one child policy, people would look at her with horror. It was not something encouraged or forced.
"Local officials have the right to force her to abort her child."
The word "right" definitely has a different definition in a communist country and a democracy country.
You should include "barbaric" b4 the word "right" to combine them into "barbaric right" in order to "justify" your action to murder wantonly an innocent and unborn life in a communist country.
So the statement should actually read as "then local officials have the barbaric right to force her to abort her child."
Proper steralisation is not barbaric (although still unacceptable to a certain extent) than an outright murder (your barbaric right).
It has got nothing to do with human right or even the issue of cultural difference when the life of an unborn child is murdered by a one-sided wishful thinking or approval.
"This is exactly what I was telling the woman when I forcibly inserted the forceps into her vagina to rip out her unapproved spawn: "You have no rights as an individual human, so shut up and respect the culture of China."
You should be the spawn in the vagina to have a taste of the barbaric right from ChinaEagle ripping you out of the vagina while saying to your carrier: "You have no rights as an individual human , so shut up..."
He is just being sarcastic.
CMyrick is only mocking ChinaEagle
My fault. I should have included a emoticon for the sarcasm impaired.
"Chinese Emperors never issued One-Child Policy edicts ;-)"
Except for Deng in '79.
Don't forget, before 1979, there was the "two is perfect, 3 is good and 4 is too much" campaign as well as the "late marriage, last birth" campaign implement from the 1960's on-ward. However, the society was too dis-orgainized to implement a program as comprehensive as the one in 1979, and a policy reversal in late 60s because of the perceived immanency of global nuclear war, though policy was re-instate in the mid-70s.
I know. But before 1970 it was produce as many as possible. However, your facts are wrong. The biggest decrease in fertility happened in the nine years before the one child policy of 1979.
It dropped from 5.5 to 2.74 in nine years from 1970 to 1979. I really question the need for the one child policy when the birth rate had dropped so sharply in the nine years before.
Certainly Chinese officials do not treat women who break laws nicely with smiling faces, just like American policemen do not treat suspects nicely with smiling faces. China has a big population. The Chinese Communist Party has already spent a lot of money to educate the low-class people, and try to let them understand the importance of population control, which is China's national policy. However, not all the people comply with the laws. That is the reason why the force abortion must be carried out.
After the Hurricane Katrina, American policemen shot many African Americans simply because they tried to steal personal belongings of others. This sounds very horrible in the eyes of the Chinese, just like how Americans feel about China's one child policy. Again, different countries have different norms and culture. People should try to understand each other's culture and norms.
it seems that that the picture vividly descripes someone like you makes you wanna make a nonsense comment in favor of your master.
You're looking at it the wrong way. It's clearly classism. If I'm rich, I can have as many babies as I want. If I'm poor, forced sterilization/abortions. I think the current fee in Shenzhen is about 210,000 RMB for a second child, so it's a good way of breeding out poor people I guess.
If it was universal across all Chinese that would be one thing, but the rich Chinese just pay to have their babies in China or go to HK/USA/Aus to give birth, then the are exempt. To be rich is glorious.
That is true, rich Chinese are able to have babies outside China. They do not break Chinese laws. It sounds unfair for the poor Chinese. However, just think of this, the poor Chinese don't pay taxes and they still want to have many children to use the public education and healthcare facilities. Do you think it is fair for the rich Chinese, who pay taxes to the country? There is no absolute fairness, not in China, and not in the U.S.
I think that China should allow rich Chinese to have 2 children while prohibit the poor to have more than 1 child. However, in practice, poor Chinese farmers living in rural areas are allowed to have 2 kids while rich Chinese living in big cities are allowed to have only 1 child. That explains why few Chinese shows mercy to Mr.Chen, who fought against the forced abortion in rural areas. The reason is very simple. The Chinese Communist Party has already been very nice to the poor but they ask too much.
Abortion might have been almost unheard of before the One Child Policy, but infanticide wasn't. Widespread infanticide is well documented in China since the Jesuits began traveling to Da Ming.
But it was their choice, not the governments. Just because individuals / families do it, does not mean the government can. What I find distasteful is Chinese people in the West complain about how Western government teaches kids to disrespect their parents. But when they are in China, people complain about people putting family ahead of country. Its OK to rat your parent to the authorities for things they said (ie during Cultural Revolution)
As I said before, China would have reached replacement fertility without resorting to the one child policy. It might take 5-6 years longer, but they would have done it. Just as Thailand, Vietnam have done.
The majority of Chinese still live in the countryside, so why shouldn't they be sympathetic? If being poor is so great, why don't you trade places and become a rice farmer?
This is coming from a "Communist". the poor ask too much ?? I thought the Communist were supposed to represent the peasants/proletariat.
Its attitudes like yours that show the sickness of modern China, you have forsaken all the Communist morality (if there is such a thing) that they spoonfed you in school, and replaced it with anything to justify what the CPC is doing. If they told you to roast a baby alive and eat it, you would do it, because hey "It reduces population, and its for the benefit of China !!"
The poor in rural areas have no pension, they depend on their child looking after them when they grow old or sic. Have more children also helps in farming. Have you ever spent couple of hours working in a rice field ?? Its back breaking work.
Say you have three sons, two go out to work, the third son stays on the farm to help his parents. Often in China, once you are 50+ you are too old to work, so many migrant workers when they reach that age go back to farming. Its their retirement income. Having 2-3 adult children helps
"The Chinese Communist Party has already been very nice to the poor but they ask too much."
Wow, you realize the KMT would still be in power without the peasants? Maybe you should invite them back to China? The CCP owes everything to the peasants, and nothing to the rich.
Peasants, like all Chinese, pay 13-17% VAT on everything at the supermarket, which is extremely regressive. So as a proportion of income, the peasants pay much more in tax than the rich. Maybe peasants are exempt from income tax, but they still pay plenty in taxes.
Under Confucian ethics, the relationship between a ruler and his subjects takes priority over the relationship between parents and children. I believe that within a Confucian framework a ruler could in some circumstances ethically demand a subject to have an abortion if there was good reason for it. Yea, I know that CCP is not officially Confucian but it does seem to be heading that direction.
I also find people who expect others to put the country ahead of their family distasteful; but I'm sure you can agree that someone who steals government money or abuses his political power for the benefit of his family is behaving in an unethical way. I've never heard anyone- Chinese or otherwise- blame western governments for teaching kids to disrespect their parents. Western children do disrespect their parents, but that is by influence of the media, Christianity, and general culture.
It has been debated many times in the past, its not as clear cut as you make it out. Alot of those statements about putting the state above family is Legalist influence, and were never attributed to Confucius himself. You have to directly find a quote from Confucius to support your contention. Here is a quote from the Analects itself
"The Governor of She in conversation with Confucius said, "In our village there is someone called '[Upright] Person'. When his father took a sheep on the sly, he reported him to the authorities." Confucius replied: "Those who are [upright] in my village conduct themselves differently. A father covers for his son, and a son covers for his father. [Uprightness consists of this].)"
I am not a philosopher, but that is my ten cents. "Confucianism" is so mixed up with Legalism and later philsophy in Chinese philosophy that often people attribute on saying to Confucius, when Confucius said something different.
The building block of Confucian society is the family. Its atomistic. Once or twice, a ruler can get away with undermining the family. If you do it on a wider scale like during the Cultural Revolution, you undermine the basic unit of society, and there will be chaos. The one child family undermines the importance of the parents, its disturbs relationships within a family. A government based on Confucius principles would be hesitant to adopt such a policy. You can't use Confucius tenets to back something that undermines the basic structure of Confucian society - the family. How could Confucius himself back such a policy, when there is a possibility his male lineage would disappear with the one child policy.
The case about disrespecting their parents, its simple. Go watch the Comedian Russel Peters and his sketch about social workers. In Asian society (Indian / Chinese), its a big no-no to call Child Protection Services if your parent is beating you. Its not a joke. Its not the media, Christianity (what has Christianity have to do with it??), its Western government via the public school system (they are the ones who control the social workers).
Confucius is a double edged sword for the authorities, that is why they never adopted in the PRC schools curriculum. Yeah, its OK if the pump your pro-Government line, but not if they actually start reading it themselves.
Chinese peasants do not need to pay any agricultural tax. That is, they do not need to pay any tax if they sell what they plant. So there is no VAT for what they sell.
What you meant is the VAT for what they buy. However, most of them do not go to supermarket. They buy vegetables, meat, and services (like haircut, construction, cleaning, making furniture, etc.) from other peasants. All these are tax-free.
No country in the world waive VAT for the poor when they buy something from supermarket. Comparing with the poor in most of the Western countries, where they are living in big (& old) cities and have to pay VAT at supermarkets, the Chinese peasants are living a much better life because they have their own land, house, and do not need to pay any tax (or only pay a few tax).
Thus, the performance of the Chinese Communist Party is much better than all parties in all Western countries.
What you said is wrong. The poor in rural areas do have pensions. If a old man or woman does not have any child, then he/she gets more pensions. Plus, the Chinese are not as cold-blooded as Westerners. Neighbors and relatives of a lonely old man/woman often offer help/money to him/her. Also China has over 40,000 "homes of respect for the aged", housing over 600,000 aged people.
My educational background is in philosophy; albeit not Chinese philosophy. I focused on Nietzsche and ancient Greek philosophy; but I did my thesis on the Confucian Ethics of Media Control in China and read Chinese philosophy. I will read the Stanford link very soon.
I definitely agree with you that Confucius himself would oppose the One-Child Policy, but Confucianism is much bigger than the works of Confucius himself (and similarly, Taoism at this point has verty little to do with the Tao Te Ching). I was simply referring to the five cardinal relationship, which have been an essential component of Confucian orthodoxy since at least the Han Dynasty. And as I said, the relationship between a Ruler and a Subject is considered to take priority over the relationship between a parent and a child.
Confucian governments have enacted laws that change or regulate family structure for over a thousand years. The question is just whether the One-Child policy truly undermines the family or whether it simply changes the family. From my personal observations, it does not intrinsically undermine the role of parents or inherently disrupt family relations. The One-Child policy does not alter the relationship between parents and children or undermine filial piety. It only greatly reduces the likelihood of siblings. The Cultural Revolution was obviously anti-Confucian and that is a whole different beast.
I have seen the Russel Peter's sketch you are referring to and frankly I am shocked that a bicentennial, undead, Indonesian would watch such a thing. In any case, the Child Protection Services simply reflects the reality that in the West the individual citizen is the atom of society and the State is the arbitrator in all conflicts between citizens. That does reduce the importance of parents, but it does not breed disrespect. The media breeds disprect towards parents through the stock character of the stupid father. I brought up Christianity because one of the most notable differences in the perception of life I noticed between the West and China is that westerners generally perceive life as a gift from God whereas the Chinese perceive life as a gift from the parents.
About Confucius, I don't want to be nit picky. but I don't want to be semantic, but I think its more accurate to say Chinese philosophy is bigger than Confucianism. Alot of things attributed to Confucianism, Confucius himself would be shocked that they are attributed to him in the first place. As some one pointed out Confucius is the soft exterior that wraps a hard Legalist interior.
You don't have to know any Chinese philosophy to know the one child policy can seriously undermine the role of parents, disrupt family relations. Why are only child usually spoiled. Supply and demand. It does change the dynamics and you see it every day in urban mainland Chinese society. You don't see it in Taiwan, Hong Kong as often, even though they have lower fertility rates. Why? The subconscious threat that your parents can increase supply - brother/sister. Its crude reducing filial piety as a supply/demand relationship, but that is what the one child policy does, you don't have to be a genius to know that.
Without the state via the courts, social services, there is not outlet for the children to challenge the parents (there is no option). The media plays a small role
Taht was only in the last 3-4 years. Pensions started at 60 for men, what is a migrant worker going to do after he has been retired from his factory position at 40-45? That is where land become important. Its to hold them over until they receive their pension at 60.
Abolishing the agriculture tax was a big mistake, and in fact its a source of a lot of problem in China. Land Seizures by rural government have shot up since the agricultural taxes were abolished. Why? The agricultural taxes were the main way that rural governments funded their operations. To make up for that short fall they have to sell land, who's land. The land farmed by farmers in the country. The land the peasants own in China, is not theirs, technically its state land.
Your whole concept of peasants not paying VAT is laughable. if you don't like paying VAT its easy, use cash. Being a peasant in China has never been easy, I rather be a peasant in Thailand/Vietnam to be frank. They don't have to worry so much about weather, better growing environment, alot fewer land seizures and traditionally had to pay fewer agricultural taxes.
Are 'peasants' in Thailand saving 10,000 USD a year?
Are peasants in China doing as well as their counterparts that moved to Africa?
"As we sat together outside the tiny two-room house they share with their teenage son, I asked why the family had made this epic journey.
"Simple," Mr Pan told me with a gentle smile, "because it is so much easier to make money here in Africa than back home in China."
He said it cost $40,000 (£25,000) to set up their farm and within a couple of months they were already making a profit. Two years on and they are selling 2,000 birds a week.
"At my age in China I can't do any serious work," Mr Pan said. "Here I don't feel old, I can still do something."
They are making a lot more than they would in China. Your anecdotal evidence does not tell you much. My story does not tell much either.
I should also add, the more hysterical the Western press is towards the 'China', 'Chinese', the 'Chinese system', the stronger the resolve is within the people in support of that system.
For those of you interested in taking the red pill, feel free to read up on the broader pattern of what Western media's coverage on China is all about here:
How do you know what the 'Chinese people' think?
How do you know huaren20000 doesn't know "Chinese people" think?
I don't know. That is why I asked.
Are you 10 years old?
Someone had said so !!
But that someone is over 200 years old, a decaying Zombie. :D
I think you are plus or minus 1 year of me ? Is that right !
Yes, I am 9 years old in dragon years.
Let's play in Jurassic park then !
We can dig Bismarck out and kick him as a ball. :D
Hidden Harmonies is where logic and intellectual credibility go to die.
qrio1 is absolutely right that it is up to the Chinese people to decided whether their system works for them on not.
China bashers may be loathe to hear about the PEW Research and other international surveys showing high approval ratings for the direction China is heading.
What those bashers will also refuse to recognize is the fact that those hundreds of millions of Chinese lifted out of abject poverty are now looking forward to even better things.
When in Shanghai, I often meet engineers from various remote areas of China. These folks are buying homes for the first time. They love the system!
Like Liu Xiaobo, the Chinese population understands what it means when a citizen tries to undermine the Chinese government politically - with foreign funding from sources like the National Endowment for Democracy.
For this reason, Chen Guangchen will never ever be viewed as a hero in China. Within a small activist community who oppose the system, Chen may be lauded. But that's all what the recent fuss will amount to.
For the Chinese, it is U.S. Embassy using it's vehicle to pick up Chen. This is a blatant interference in China's internal affairs. Again, the Chinese population will not side with Chen nor the Western press narrative against their system.
Certainly, America is incredibly powerful and China relatively much weaker. China has to 吃苦, and that's just the reality. China is pragmatic and tolerates. That *system* is enabling her to see the broader picture - the importance of a calmer relationship with America.
The Chinese system is not perfect. The Chinese people know it. Corruption, environmental degradation, tainted food, income disparity, you name it.
What the Western press continue to discount is that the Chinese know when their system is weakened, vultures from abroad will be swirling. There's a lot of inconvenient truths in the last couple of centuries, and the system is smart enough to never let its people forget!
As the Chinese middle class grows, as they become more educated about the world, as the economy becomes more varied and sophisticated, a simple truth will become clear to them: The source of the wealth of China is not the ruling party or its precious system, but the middle class itself. The system, with all of its corruption and coercion, maintains the power and perogatives of the rulers; it does not produce wealth. Those threatening outsiders (heads up hauren2000, the Opium Wars have been over for a while, now) don't actually threaten the middle class, they only threaten the ruling class. The CCP had to free the economy from the oppressive grip of the CCP before it could blossom to new wealth. The new middle class created the wealth. The only brilliant insight the CCP has ever had is that selectively applied coercion allows citizens to generate more wealth than broadly applied coercion. When the CCP is disposed of few tears will be shed.
I think you are taking an anti-CCP view that is approaching the religiosity not unlike how the Crusading Christians viewed the Muslims.
Look, this is what is going to transpire:
1. China will continue her industrial revolution. A reflection of that is the 50% urbanization rate as of today, which when complete, will more likely be in the 90% range.
2. China's ability to not allow special interests to wreck havoc will allow her to have a more equitable society.
a. Think how Wall Street was bailed out by public money for their derivative swaps and the subprime mess.
b. Think how the Chinese banks are restrained from lending when the government was trying to cool down inflation.
3. Rule of law will continue
China continues to reform and beef up legal and judicial system.
a. Think about the recently updated criminal procedure laws.
b. Think about the citizen's and media's right to know laws.
There is a cultural aspect which will take some time for these reform to entrench. China is training legal professionals like there is no tomorrow. U.S. has 1 for 300 citizens. China at 9000. Those stats are improving.
Corruption is rampant, but will slowly improve. Workers are suing and winning in China now.
It's a balance between corporations and workers benefits. Government's job is to help strike that balance to maximize growth or other aspects.
4. China's national strength continues to gain ground
a. Look at the infrastructure build out.
b. Look at China's new industries: passenger aircraft, Beidou navigation satellite system, solar and battery, etc.
c. Look at literacy rate, infant mortality, number of people pulled out of poverty, etc..
Finally, sure, Opium War was a long time ago. But the NATO bombing of Libya wasn't that long ago was it? If you are weak and Western countries don't like you, you get bombed.
hauren20000 misses on one important point. The NATO bombing of Libya was indirectly ASKED for by a large chunk of the population to help rid itself of Ghadafi. Internally defecting leadership and lots of regular folks blatantly requested Western help to level the playing field between his armed forces and their resistance. Perhaps they were mainly Fezzan and Cyrenain folks, but nevertheless Libyans. And the NATO air campaign was fairly selective in targeting Ghadafi's military/party paramilitary as opposed to general population.
That really is different from intervention in support of Tibet, Uighur Xinjiang, or Inner Mongolia, which are minority groups within China. What is happening in the minority regions of China may be unjust perhaps, but it isn't genocide. And diplomatic pressure isn't armed intervention. Lumping this all together ignores a real issue of intervention to prevent genocide. Are you also saying that an intervention in Bosnia to stop the slaughter was unjustified or the refusal to do do in Rwanda was a good thing? Its not so simple.
One last point since you remarked on the Opium Wars. I also recall the Taiping Rebellion in the 1850s where China's central gov't actually asked for British support to suppress the Taipings.
Nah, you are missing the point on Libya. Western political NGO's start funding small factions. After a decade or two, those factions become sufficiently largely enough to receive arms. From there, conflict escalates. Voila, you get a crisis primed for some sort of outside military intervention. That formula has been repeated all too often and everyone can see it.
Funny thing you should bring up the Taiping Rebellion. The key issue there is to not let religion and politics mix. The Chinese paid a terrible price for it for letting religion running a mock.
Hence, the Chinese government is smart to crack down on illegal house churches. They are smart to make sure Bishops in China are not politically obedient to the Vatican. This is an example for the world.
We must agree to disagree on the Libya campaign then. But the point about political NGOs may have some validity. Witness the recent international political arms of the US political parties in Egypt. The gov't there was opposed to those for a reason. But I don't agree that they are part of a formula aimed a provoking outside military intervention. Not all NGOs are inherently political. That smacks of paranoia such as Putin in Russia who went beyond the political NGOs to go after all of them. I also think you draw the wrong point about religion in China. The Catholic Church has been active in the US since colonical times and the Vatican does not call the shots here (including the Kennedy years). If they crack down on unlicensed religious movements, its because they become the foci of internal dissent and not because they give room for Western intervention. So they do mix religion and politics through repression of dissent. Its not just the illegal house churches but Falun Gong and Tibetan Buddhism as well.
I went to graduate school with many talented PRC nationals. China is getting a lot of things right (and the US, regrettably, very wrong), but what you laud is not one of them. I remember very well a talented friend from Shenyang who was unfortunate enought to be in Beijing during the Tianamen protests. He was a true Chinese patriot and nationalist who believed in a strong China too, but also disappeared, was purged from his official listings, and I never heard of him again.
Certainly, not every NGO is bad. China in fact embraces quite a few foreign funded NGO's too. There are environmental groups there promoting environmentalism. Ford Foundation is doing work there. Gates and Melinda Foundation.
To think that National Endowment for Democracy is some cuddly creature is laughable.
The Catholic Church has always been a political animal. Active during the Cold War too. I find it given it's history, Westerners are still allowing religion to mix with politics. It's an alarming trend.
China does not suppress Buddhism of any form. China suppresses the Dalai Lama's use of Buddhism as a political tool. Its a huge difference.
The fact that your Shenyang friend has lost touch says nothing. If you follow most of the students who went to protest in 1989, for the most part, they now realize that was a mistake.
The Soviet Union was an example of what could have happened to China if the 89 protest succeeded.
You are evil.
You are evil.
Don't say that, it's so hurtful!!
Congrats, Christ.
My Goodness, Huaren2000, you certainly are earning your 50 cents today!!!
Congratulations on your new prosperity and many happy returns, glorious comrade.
Roundeye Capitalist Running Dog
It really goes to show the amazing purchasing power parity of the RMB doesn't it?
Look, you have all these so called Western 'journalists' all looking up each others rear end when reporting about China. I often wonder why. You really just need a few. Copy & paste everywhere.
Let the rest of the herd do something productive. Maybe mow your and my lawn? Pick vegetables in America's farms? (Btw, I heard there's a shortage of workers there.)
The NGO situation is still pretty miserly. I wanted to start a charity drive in my neighborhood and the local party office said it could only be run as an official government function. I tried to work with my friends at UNICEF Hong Kong to plan a charity run, but they said they aren't allowed to do any work in the mainland. Salvation Army HK is the same, their website is actually blocked in China.
I did just see a poster for volunteering near the bus stop, but the volunteers are all associated with the Communist Youth League. This is really terrible because I think it's the poor who suffer. I'm not going to volunteer for a function that helps a cadre gain face, and I think other people feel the same.
NGO is GO!! :D
That is the difference between the US and China.
And you are right, the Chinese goverment can do whatever it wants, and its efforts are working on the big picture for the country (high GDP and poverty rates decreasing fast). And I also understand why you see this as a interference in China's internal affairs.
But if the US can do something that supports the backbone of the american spirit, to show that it cares about the basic rights of every individual everywhere, it always will.
Certainly, there are many well-meaning Americans. When America is sincere, of course, China embraces. As I said above, China welcomes such NGO's. Chinese leaders often says China welcomes U.S. input as long they are provided with sincerity and respect.
The Chinese are thankful for the United States defeating Japan, otherwise who knows how much the untold sufferings to continue.
BUT, why should the Chinese be subject to American fetish for the "american spirit," whatever that means?
When you said:
"But if the US can do something that supports the backbone of the american spirit, to show that it cares about the basic rights of every individual everywhere, it always will."
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Do a Google search on Iraqi children under the effects of depleted uranium.
Chinese are only subject to their government.
An the only ridiculous thing here is to try to legitimize forced abortions.
Iraqis?? They'll be thankfull. But, what does that have to do with the article?
You should discuss this subject with the Pope, not with chinese and CPC.
Ohh the easy way out... :( You should not be reading this magazine and be watching CCTV.
There you can't discuss, but you can here, right?
Some people who are ignorant of Chinese laws may think forced abortions are legal in China. THEY ARE NOT. Go read up on China's family planning regulations.
While CGC's law suit on behalf of women who were allegedly brutalized failed, the family planning commission did investigate and found some Linyi officials wrong in their enforcement of the rules.
Why did I bring up Iraq? Very simple. You profess that Americans care about other people, but the truth is there are tons of examples where Americans don't.
I am surprised I have to spell this out for you. It's no less appalling than a Catholic priest preaching "good" and secretly molesting children.
CCTV is light years better than Western media in terms of balance for international news. The Western media is a propagandizing whore.
I am surprised I have to spell this out for you. It's no less appalling than a Catholic priest preaching "good" and secretly molesting children.
The church even paid to shut up victim's mouth !! Many cases happened in the world, they were waiting to be exposed.
I don't have CCTV but just European media online. Sorry.
I think you will find a good friend, The Pope !! He will agree with you totally on abortion. Condom is also a Tabu for him. More Catholic means more tax for the church. More priests, more children to be ....
That depends on which channel. The English-language channel is pleasingly international, and about as likely to have a story from Africa as from Europe, and far more likely to do so than an European news channel, even though Africa is much closer to Europe than China is. Likewise with the USA and South America. The US channels are probably the worst, basically only covering countries the US is currently at war with or very major calamities elsewhere.
The Chinese language international offerings are more modest, particularly the popular channels.
There is a high value to stability. Many times in the past China has lost that stability, and the result has always been horrific. The incredible gains for the Chinese people the last generation, the greatest uplifting from poverty in the history of mankind, were dependent on that stability. And a willingness to bear hardship and sacrifices for the next generation (or for the more privileged, themselves).
Chen may not be "the saviour of the nation", but who would be best for the stability of China, one who within the laws of the country exposed illegal abuse of power, or the ones doing the abusing? http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2012-04/16/content_15054007.htm
"In 1996, the rule of law was written into the outline of the ninth Five-Year Plan (1996-2000) for national economic and social development and the long-range objectives to 2010, becoming an important principle for guiding China's modernization drive.
The "rule of law" does not only mean running State affairs according to law, it also indicates that administrators must obey the law and handle State affairs through legal means. It is a comprehensive and profound change from the tradition of "rule by man", which had been practiced in China for thousands of years.
The rule of law can ensure that China's development is not affected by uncertain factors and avoid upheavals such as the "cultural revolution" (1966-76).
Although China has encountered many difficulties, the country is marching forward along the right road. In 2010, a socialist system of laws with Chinese characteristics was established as scheduled. Solving problems through legal means has become the consensus of the Party and the people."
Which is worse for China?
1. An activist who got money from the NED in collusion with ChinaAid - both parties are politically anti-Chinese government. Sure, this activist exposed some terrible local officials.
2. Some terrible local officials abusing people while enforcing China's one-child policy.
Of course #1 is worse.
For every #1 that exists in China, there are probably 1 million activists who work within Chinese law with Chinese society's interest at heart.
Corruption, Coercion and Control is how China has been ruled for millennia and the majority of the Han Chinese seem to really believe that this Chinese way of governance is a deeply imbedded characteristic of Chinese Confucian culture and hence (by default) far superior to the more "chaotic" Hans-Solo-style Western political ideas of "freedom, dignity and sanctity of the individual human being".
you should be less hateful in life now that your dream lady got her wish to visit her fatherland and citizen sons in UK.
Ever so mindful not to show her slip of belittling burma and burmese people like you, she is to also visit norway (or is it Sweden?) on the same trip to cover her track of being partial to her country of citizenship, the other one.
how cunning of you not saying anything about it, being so opinionated about china but not a word on your own motherland burma?
Are you saying MingZe (or Mimi) Xi should leave Harvard Kennedy School of Government and come back home to Daddy Jinping Xi, the new boss in Peking. Long live handsome Xilai Bo and his Ferrari boy Guagua Bo!
[tocharian May 11th, 06:37
Corruption, Coercion and Control is how China has been ruled for millennia and the majority of the Han Chinese seem to really believe that this Chinese way of governance is a deeply imbedded characteristic of Chinese Confucian culture and hence (by default) far superior to the more "chaotic" Hans-Solo-style Western political ideas of "freedom, dignity and sanctity of the individual human being".]
The Chinese does NOT believe their 'Confucian culture' is 'far superior to the more "chaotic" Hans-Solo-style Western political ideas'. That is why they do NOT try to impose their social values on Western societies.
It is the imperialist West that believe THEIR Western culture is "far superior" to other cultures. That is why they go around the world kicking arses in order to impose their system on the rest of the world.
Can't you be honest for once in your entire miserable life???
A pro China poster replying with an ad hominem. This kind of stuff gives you a bad name.
Can you not be the old windbag who watches way too much Japanese porn for once ?
No no no Devil's, who is American, watches white girl porn. Japanese porn is usually only enticing for people living in predominantly East Asian countries (China, Korea, Japan) for obvious reasons. The only people who watching Japanese porn in the US are people who have fetishes for East Asian girls.
BTW did you just resort to a 100% personal attack post against someone who is not named watchingchina or PL123? SHAME ON YOU NEIL HEYWOOD
It's only an ad hominem argument if kommonsenses was trying to refute tocharian's argument by pointing out the negative characteristics of tocharian (and there are many of those). However what kommonsenses did was solely point out the negative characteristics of tocharian without trying to refute tocharian's argument. Hence what kommonsenses wrote was not an ad hominem argument but merely a personal attack.
A poor understanding of logic gives you, personally, a bad name.
Don't press the playback button please--insulting people and defending your Boss? Concentrate on selling the drug from young to old !!
Why don't you offer a serious counter-argument for once?
Yeah, like talking about crying uncle all the time. And hosting the likes of Al Qeada, and reprinting your letters to SCMP for nth time.
[Bismarck888in reply to Devils 16th, 21:09
Yeah, like talking about crying uncle all the time. And hosting the likes of Al Qeada, and reprinting your letters to SCMP for nth time.]
All those are proper responses. That is called Retaliation in Kind!
BTY, why does Japanese porn comes so readily to your mind? Is it because it comes with your job?
This story perfectly illustrates the old Chinese proverb, "When the top pillars are not aligned, the bottom pillars will be bent". Despite the lip service on democratic reform and human rights rolling out of Premier Wen's silver tongue, the central government has little incentive to safeguard individuals' rights and freedom. This translates to horrifying abuses in the provinces, where the rule of law is seldom observed and oversight on the authorities is close to non-existent.
Lots of people in China simply are expendable when it comes to their rulers especially those living in the countryside. Been that way for 3,000+ yrs and will continue to be that for the foreseeable future.
Also -"He was named Shandong province's chief of propaganda in 2007".
Chief of propoganda is an official title?? lol
It is quite amazing how at least 2 of the 3 underlying goals sound completely logical and sane (economic growth and social integration), but the means to achieve them are pretty horrifying.
Limiting population growth isn't perfectly logical and sane? Have you not noticed how horribly overpopulated China and most of Asia is? The world has a finite amount of land and resources. We should never forget that.
The Center cares more about the fulfillment of the goals than what means are used to fulfill them. That might sometimes result in 'horrifying' results, but if you ever live in China you'll see that is hardly the norm.
The emperors not only know, they designed the system, which is essential for them to stay in power and make room for the local authorities to reward themselves by rent-seeking. This system has been there for centuries, and effectively keeps local officials loyal to emperors, otherwise they would be purged in a anti-corruption campaign.
No amount of outside pressure will make the emperor to change the system. Its not whether emperor knows or not that will determine the outcome. Its whether the people of China know and realize the long term implication of this system or not that can correct this repressive system.
The current repressive system is succeeding only because the emperor and his cronies have successfully used its propaganda machine to distract most of its people by dazzling (Olympics, World Expo, space exploration etc.) and external threat (funding from NED, the challenge of territorial sovereignty by Philippines/Vietnam etc.). But the repeated holes that appear in this propaganda machine by internet tools and more people-to-people contacts between Chinese nationals and the outside world are making things harder for the emperor. Afterall, the emperor fears its own people more than any of the outside enemies. Lets see how this drama ends.
A little ontological in the self reply.
The Economist explains: Who would pay a "mansion tax"
The Economist explains
Football and British politics: David Cameron's own goal
Game theory
Britain's election campaign: April 26th: The silence of David Cameron
The week ahead: A very normal affair
Football and politics: David Cameron's own goal
America's Ukrainian mission: Training wheels
Have you listened to The Economist Radio on Facebook?
The Economist Radio is an on-demand social listening platform that allows you to listen, share and recommend The Economist audio content
Test your EQ
Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines
Want more from The Economist?
Visit The Economist e-store and you'll find a range of carefully selected products for business and pleasure, Economist books and diaries, and much more


text:
There are currently no items in your cart.
The Croods
Music from the Motion Picture Soundtrack
The Croods (Music from the Motion Picture Soundtrack). Composed by Alan Silvestri. For Piano/Vocal/Guitar. Piano Solo Songbook. Softcover. Published by Hal Leonard (HL.119845).
ISBN 1480345210. 9x12 inches.
Fictitious cave men and creatures of the prehistoric era are brought to life in this delightful 2013 animated DreamWorks film. Our songbook features nine selections penned by Alan Silvestri from the soundtrack in piano solo arrangements: Cantina Croods • Cave Painting Theme • Going Guy's Way • Grug Flips His Lid • Planet Collapse • Prologue • Shine Your Way • Story Time • We'll Die If We Stay Here.
- Prologue
- Story Time
- Cantina Croods
- Cave Painting Theme
- Going Guy's Way
- Grug Flips His Lid
- Planet Collapse
- We'll Die If We Stay Here
- Shine Your Way
Customers Who Bought The Croods Also Bought:
Kingston Town $3.95
The Beatles for Banjo $14.99
Emmanuel $22.95
The Piano Guys $19.99
Minecraft -- Volume Alpha $14.99
Super Mario Jazz Piano Arrangements $14.99
Musical Theatre Anthology For Teens... $17.99 $14.39
Matilda - The Musical $19.99 $15.99
Christmas Songs for Banjo $7.95
The Croods
Music from the Motion Picture Soundtrack
- Explain exactly why you liked or disliked the product. Do you like the artist? Is the transcription accurate? Is it a good teaching tool?
- Consider writing about your experience and musical tastes. Are you a beginner who started playing last month? Do you usually like this style of music?
- Feel free to recommend similar pieces if you liked this piece, or alternatives if you didn't.
- Be respectful of artists, readers, and your fellow reviewers. Please do not use inappropriate language, including profanity, vulgarity, or obscenity.
- Avoid disclosing contact information (email addresses, phone numbers, etc.), or including URLs, time-sensitive material or alternative ordering information.
- We cannot post your review if it violates these guidelines. If you have any suggestions or comments on the guidelines, please email us.
- All submitted reviews become the licensed property of Sheet Music Plus and are subject to all laws pertaining thereto. If you believe that any review contained on our site infringes upon your copyright, please email us.
- Read Sheet Music Plus's complete Privacy Policy
The Croods
Music from the Motion Picture Soundtrack
Tell a friend (or remind yourself) about this product. We'll instantly send an email containing product info and a link to it. You may also enter a personal message.
We do not use or store email addresses from this form for any other purpose than sending your share email.
Read our Privacy Policy.
Now you can also view your purchased titles on your iPad with our
free Sheet Music Plus Digital Print Viewer app.
With Digital Print, you can print from your computer immediately after purchase, or wait until its convenient. And our software installation is easy - we'll guide you through the simple steps to make sure you have Adobe Flash Player, Adobe AIR and the Sheet Music Plus AIR application on your computer.
See all System Requirements for Digital Print
Note: Our Digital Print items are purchased solely through our website. By purchasing a Digital Print item, you are authorized by the publisher to print out the purchased number of copies for that particular title. Thus, we are unable to fax, mail or email digital titles in any form or file format (including PDF) as it violates copyright law.
Google Chrome Users: The most recent Google Chrome update is not compatible with Adobe AIR. We recommend using an alternate browser (such as Internet Explorer, Safari, or Firefox) in order to download Adobe AIR and print your music.
Digital Print - Available Instantly!
If you have any questions, comments or concerns, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.com.
Make a wish list for gifts, suggest standard repertoire, let students know which books to buy, boast about pieces you've mastered: Music Lists are as unique as the musician! Easily share your music lists with friends, students, and the world.
To create a music list, please sign in.
Existing Accounts New AccountsSave up to 25% on New Releases for Piano Solo at Sheet Music Plus
First 50 Classical Pieces You Shoul... $14.99 $11.24
40 Piazzolla Tangos for Piano $19.99 $14.99
Endless Communion $18.95 $14.21
33. Gospel $16.99 $12.74
Popular Performer -- Great American... $19.99 $14.99
2015 Greatest Pop & Movie Hits $14.99 $11.24
Cocktail Piano $16.99 $12.74
The Theory of Everything $14.99 $11.24
How to Train Your Dragon $14.99 $11.24
Popular Songs for Piano Solo - 14 S... $16.99 $12.74
Bernstein Broadway Piano Solos $12.99 $9.74
Beethoven - Complete Piano Sonatas $34.99 $26.24
Fifty Shades Of Grey $19.99 $14.99
Chopin: The Ultimate Piano Collecti... $35.00 $26.25
See Similar Sheet Music
More by this Composer: Alan Silvestri Sheet Music Alan Silvestri Piano, Vocal, Guitar Sheet Music Alan Silvestri Voice Sheet Music Alan Silvestri Guitar Sheet Music Alan Silvestri Piano Solo Sheet Music
Instrument: Piano, Vocal, Guitar Sheet Music Voice Sheet Music Guitar Sheet Music Piano Solo Sheet Music
Genre: Movies Sheet Music
Format: Collection / Songbook

subset: commoncrawl


text:
We think you're from click the flag above to confirm. You can change your region above any time for local news and competitions!
In case you missed CeeLo's interview and Goodie Mob's performance of "Amy," you can watch them in the players below! CLICK HERE to get "Amy" on iTunes
Posted: Thu 03 Oct 2013
Loading tweets...
....believe I was born with this purpose. I love everyone, Lo - Bridges http://t.co/bDpLXMVv6VWed, 03 Sep 2014 05:55:08 GMT
This song is my absolute truth! It's all I ever wanted to be as an artist, man, and human being. I wholeheartedly...Wed, 03 Sep 2014 05:54:59 GMT
I truly and deeply apologize for the comments attributed to me on Twitter. Those comments were idiotic, untrue and not what I believe.Wed, 03 Sep 2014 03:19:12 GMT
Browse news archives:


text:
Units of Study Offered in Japanese Studies
Note: the Summer session of JPNS1611 Japanese 1 will not be offered by the Summer School in 2015. Instead, JPNS1611is being offered in intensive mode in January 2015 (session 101).
Students wishing to enrol may do so via Sydney Student. Classes commence on 5 January.
JPNS1801 - Japanese Exchange
Semester 1, 2012 | Credit Points: 6
A timetable is not available for this session.
Please refer to the list of Units of Study on the left-hand menu to view the units on offer for the relevant academic year.
The information displayed above is indicative only as online information is subject to change without notice. The Faculty Handbook and the University of Sydney Calendar are the official legal source of information relating to study at the University of Sydney


text:
Top Definition
meaning that one's penis is so large, it seems to be three penis' morphed into one super large penis. It is from the origin of "tro" meaning enormous and "penis" meaning a male's genitalia.
"Oh my God, forgot Gary's parsnip, I want your tropenis!"
автор: Toad Crack
28 февраля 2012


text:
A team of researchers from Brazil recently determined that the Cayenne tick which frequents the southern United States and South and Central America, does not transmit one of the disease's primary causative protozoa.
To continue reading this article, become a member of TheHorse.com.
It's FREE and you'll get full access to more than 20,000 articles, video, free reports & more.


text:
REVIEW: Broken City
Great cast. Unrealistic, unbelievable story line.
Russell Crowe is corrupt New York City Mayor Hostetler (is someone a fan of the '91 Giants and Superbowl winning quarterback Jeff Hostetler??) who for some reason has a
Barry Pepper is the city councilman out to unseat the mayor with Kyle Chandler as his campaign manager. Jeffrey Wright is the police commissioner. No complaints with the acting. It's the storyline that needs help. It'll have you rolling your eyes. It's not awful - but it's really not worthy of your hard-earned money.
"Broken City" is a broken movie.
1-and-a-half stars.


text:
Obviously you should be part of the development team too? ;)
Printable View
How I can compile R800 support on Ubuntu Maverick? I like to try and test it.
I've found an guide for old driver like this (modified from me):
It's correct for activate alpha accelleration on X?Code:git clone git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati
git branch -b origin/evergreen_accel
git checkout evergreen_accel
./configure --prefix=/usr
sudo make install
Some more options on xorg.conf?
I'm using gentoo, but these are the general steps. If some of them seem unclear to you, you may be better off not installing an experimental driver in the first place ;)
- get rid of fglrx if possible. At the very least, you must be able to boot without loading fglrx.ko, and fglrx's opengl libraries must not conflict with mesa's.
- install the firmware package. Check /lib/firmware/radeon/ if it's installed already. For evergreen, there's three files for each GPU type. Check wikipedia if your model is cedar, cypress, juniper or redwood (or just include them all).
- install kernel 3.5.35 or later, activate radeon DRI and KMS. Either compile them as modules, or force your kernel to include the firmware.
- install mesa git from last saturday or newer. If you're lucky, there's a package on PPA. Disable gallium, evergreen support is classic mesa only.
- install radeon, evergreen branch. I suggest installing to something like /opt/evergreen/ (create that directory first) to avoid messing with system files.
- adjust xorg.conf to search the module where you installed it. You need to change the ModulePathCode:git clone 'git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati'
cd xf86-video-ati
git co evergreen_accel
./autogen.sh --prefix=/opt/evergreen/
sudo make install
Make sure you understand each step so you'll be able to undo what you've done. The driver isn't stable, expect some corruption and xorg crashes.Code:Section "Files"
ModulePath "/opt/evergreen/lib/xorg/modules,/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
Good luck.
Very thank you for your help!!!
Before read your post, I've tried this
Modified with evergreen_accel I got 3D support (with some corruption but I'm happy anywat).Code:git clone git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/xorg/driver/xf86-video-ati
git branch --track atombios-support origin/atombios-support
git checkout atombios-support
./configure --prefix=/usr
sudo make install
Now I'll try to clean up (roll back) and use your clean method.
I really appreciated your help :)
Probably local alias for checkout. Used for changing active branch in git.
Using today's git master of all Xorg libs, protos, server, mesa drm, and mesa/mesa. Linux 2.6.36-rc2-git3. Have a HD5970. Fully preemptible 1000 Hz. drm and radeon modules built-in to kernel.
Boot-up takes an extremely long time to switch to the KMS framebuffer. On the dmesg I see:
Later on, in Xorg.0.log, I seeCode:[ 62.288248] r600_cp: Failed to load firmware "radeon/CYPRESS_pfp.bin"
[ 62.288309] [drm:evergreen_startup] *ERROR* Failed to load firmware!
[ 123.205570] r600_cp: Failed to load firmware "radeon/CYPRESS_pfp.bin"
[ 123.205611] [drm:evergreen_startup] *ERROR* Failed to load firmware!
[ 123.205645] radeon 0000:05:00.0: disabling GPU acceleration
[ 123.206744] radeon 0000:05:00.0: ffff8801b653b400 unpin not necessary
[ 123.206769] radeon 0000:05:00.0: ffff8801b653b400 unpin not necessary
[ 123.206799] failed to evaluate ATIF got AE_BAD_PARAMETER
I've therefore got no 3d accel, but 2d accel is nice and stable, and actually quite fast, even with the core set to its minimum clock frequency using the power management profiles. Verified:Code:[ 464.362] (II) RADEON(0): GPU accel disabled or not working, using shadowfb for KMS
[ 464.362] (II) Loading sub module "shadow"
[ 464.362] (II) LoadModule: "shadow"
[ 464.362] (II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/libshadow.so
[ 464.368] (II) Module shadow: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[ 464.545] (II) RADEON(1): GPU accel disabled or not working, using shadowfb for KMS
[ 464.545] (II) Loading sub module "shadow"
[ 464.545] (II) LoadModule: "shadow"
[ 464.546] (II) Reloading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/libshadow.so
I've got both DVI outputs plugged into an LCD; could this be related to using dual monitors?Code:# cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/radeon_pm_info
default engine clock: 725000 kHz
current engine clock: 399990 kHz
default memory clock: 1000000 kHz
current memory clock: 1000000 kHz
voltage: 1000 mV
FWIW, the firmware seemed to have worked with 188.8.131.52, but I was still stuck in software rendering. I had a lot of different variables there though, such as building drm and radeon as modules.
Right now I'm going on 45 minutes running X without a crash, but since it's a shadowfb on top of KMS, this isn't very surprising; developers have presumably been testing this configuration for months while 2d/3d support was in the works.
And yes I'm using evergreen_accel. No xorg.conf.


text:
We think you're from click the flag above to confirm. You can change your region above any time for local news and competitions!
Le single de Cee Lo Green "Fuck You" est rentré directement n°1 des ventes de singles devant Robbie Williams ou encore Swedish House Mafia !
Téléchargez le single "Fuck You"
Posted: Mon 18 Oct 2010
Loading tweets...
....believe I was born with this purpose. I love everyone, Lo - Bridges http://t.co/bDpLXMVv6VWed, 03 Sep 2014 05:55:08 GMT
This song is my absolute truth! It's all I ever wanted to be as an artist, man, and human being. I wholeheartedly...Wed, 03 Sep 2014 05:54:59 GMT
I truly and deeply apologize for the comments attributed to me on Twitter. Those comments were idiotic, untrue and not what I believe.Wed, 03 Sep 2014 03:19:12 GMT
Browse news archives: