We all have the ability to interprate incoming information. . Simply adjusting the information to suit our needs then labeling it "the truth" Is hardly an indication of aquired knowledge.
We all do it. . . Being blind about it can be cured. . .
classic cars - directory - Southern cross Engines
If Optimising for google gives you a headache? - try optimising your Users
I think China has the opertunity, responsibility and obligation to evolve its own nations Internet in a way that reflects its history and politics. just leaving the doors wide open to outside influences seems to me to be unwise. China is evolving its own Capitalistic principles, it is borrowing aspects of the West that suit its goals. it is not hard to pick its achievement in Improving the lot of a great number of its citizens
I do not see why We should not look at the way the Internet in China grows without at least one eye on recent Chinese history. Looking at China from a western Viewpoint with western values is simply not the way Chinese viewer will look at it.
A carbon Copy of the way the USA does it ? . . . That has to be a joke .
back on topic
classic cars - directory - Southern cross Engines
If Optimising for google gives you a headache? - try optimising your Users
Humour,
I just received an email asking me if I am a communist (I thought this question was funny) therefore my humorous response
I consider myself to be a "Flux Davision"
The reason; My surname is Davis I follow my own philosophy - hence "Davision"
My opinions are always in a state of flux and I find my opinions altering as I understand things differently each time new information filters into my thick (but penetrable scull)
hence Flux Davision
I shall refer the emailer to this post.
classic cars - directory - Southern cross Engines
If Optimising for google gives you a headache? - try optimising your Users
Some people will respond with accusations of "COMMUNIST!" or "SOCIALIST!" to anyone that expresses any sort of understanding of any country not their own.
I merely applied your posited conclusion to such conclusion!Originally Posted by Tubby
Conclusion based on what?
So, the rest of the world should turn a blind eye to its failure to live up to its international agreements re. human rights?
Following your argument, parents should be given unfettered freedom to treat their children as they alone deem fit.
You can follow my thoughts anywhere you want to deep. I think you have deliberately used the word 'follow' to off track . I certainly never lead any pathway to"unfettered freedom to treat children as they alone feel fit" You yourself chose that route Deepsand, certainly not me. Why do you look at things this way.
I refered in a previous post to
"Your own ability to manipulate what is written by others is testament to my statement, Deep."
I said "If there was truth. . I think you clearly would demonstrate a lack of respect for it. . ."
Relating what I wrote to teatment of children - Is bordering on Evil. .
That Is a Bloody big Jump from anything I said. . . A bloody big jump. I am not pleased that you used the word "Follow" . . . Do not blame my words for any thought path your mind wander along. My words start and end on the page that they were written.
I am afraid your Relating what I wrote to teatment of children. made me angry Deep.
The first priority of any civilised person is the protection of our young.
Suggesting my words lead to a pathway that is in total contradiction to my core beliefs leaves me out of here. Discuss this topic with yourself deepsand.
classic cars - directory - Southern cross Engines
If Optimising for google gives you a headache? - try optimising your Users
P.S.
I wrote
"Looking at China from a western Viewpoint with western values is simply not the way Chinese viewer will look at it."
I honestly believe that the Chinese do not view China from a USA standpoint.
No value judgement in the above statement.
You jumped to
"So, the rest of the world should turn a blind eye to its failure to live up to its international agreements re. human rights?
Following your argument, parents should be given unfettered freedom to treat their children as they alone deem fit. "
I had no argument Deepsand. merely an honest observation. right or wrong. . Now I am really out of here. .
classic cars - directory - Southern cross Engines
If Optimising for google gives you a headache? - try optimising your Users
So, the rest of the world should turn a blind eye to its failure to live up to its international agreements re. human rights?
The I Amendment to the US Constitution is what deepsand and I are familiar with. Americans didn’t actually invent the concept. It’s a thread of thought that extends in many places, but since you are in Australia, Tubby, the key is that it is a right RECOGNIZED (the Bill of Rights doesn’t GRANT rights, it RECOGNIZES them) throughout the common law countries (UK/Canada/Australia/NZ, etc.)
Unfettered, no, but parentage is actually a fundamental right recognized in the US.
Yes, on this point, I agree with Tubby, deep. With respect to this thread, Tubby is essentially interjecting a cultural relativism argument, ie. Americans have no business telling China what rights to recognize and then assuming that Tubby would interject the same argument with respect to parentage if say, a father decided his teenage daughter should be subject to genital mutilation in sub-Saharan Africa.
However, where I disagree with you Tubby is in your analysis that an American viewpoint of the natural rights of man (specifically the rights as defined by the I Amendment) somehow turns us into the ‘ugly American’ if, when observing China, we don’t particularly care for the fact that their government does not rate very well when it comes to such rights. When I view the situation, I don’t contend that they should translate the US Constitution and ratify it….but what I do see are the Chinese themselves seeking those very same rights. I see the Falun Gong protestors in NYC, the very fact that China blocks access to certain websites implies that somebody in China itself is seeking information from that blocked source.
Content based restrictions are a foundation of propaganda which permit the state to control and to manipulate the marketplace of ideas to their advantage. Both the US and Australia have Chinese immigrants and the descendants of Chinese immigrants, many of whom came to realize economic opportunity and to enjoy freedom, the Chinese, culturally, have no objection to rights similar to those as expressed in the I Amendment, Taiwan’s Constitution: Office of the President, Republic of China(Taiwan)
The PRC obviously signed onto the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, so apparently the tenets of freedom of speech/press aren’t inimical to the PRC, either….or at least until it just isn’t convenient to the state. Wasn’t that all the hubbub about the IV Amendment (wireless wiretapping) and an unconstitutional suspension of habeas corpus about? Ie. that necessity dictated those actions? Well, guess what, the Supreme Court said that the Constitution applies even when it isn’t particularly convenient (I guess checks and balances works occasionally).
As Jefferson so eloquently wrote, “Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” – so if being critical of China’s abuses of the natural rights of man makes me an ugly American, so be it.
If you're interested you can check out some of my postings over at usconstitution.net where we discuss various constitutional issues.
Craig Walenta on Google+
Well stated, Craig. If I didn't already know, I think I could guess your profession.
I didn't get any "ugly American" inference from Tubby's post. All I got from it was the opinion that it is arrogant to assume that others should want what you want. I can't argue with that.
However, I think it runs deeper. We (in the West, generally, not just the US) tend to project upon others our ideals, philosophies and strategies. We are currently getting our collective butt kicked in Afghanistan, because the powers that be want to believe that the Afghanis will think, plan and react as we would in the same situation. Failing to recognize and ACCEPT that there are cultural differences that simply render that impossible for them, short of generations of cultural evolution, is truly arrogant.
Even Gen. Douglas McArthur, who certainly was as arrogant as they come, readily admitted that the Japanese culture was not conducive to Western thinking, and that to attempt to force it upon them would ensure their ruin. We seem to repeatedly insist upon expecting others to want what we would want, to think what we would think and to do what we would do, and then, when they don't, we bring pressure of one kind or another to bear, "for their own good." While I happen to think that much of that "good" might be greatly appreciated, once tried, the simple truth is, the resentment of being pressured often overshadows the benefits.
And that's completely ignoring the fact that simply because we believe they would appreciate our style of freedom, doesn't necessarily mean that they will.
In the case of the Muslim world, how can we expect them to embrace the notion that freedom such as ours will protect them from manipulation by their government? Their very religion (as it exists today) mandates such manipulation. It has for many generations, and they are naturally going to resent outsiders trying to force such change upon them, regardless of the motivation.
In China, the generations of history of people being manipulated and enslaved by the government present a similar problem, although I would suspect to a lesser degree. Never having tasted "freedom", the concept is surreal to them, and as such, I think it is unrealistic to think that we will see a major freedom movement sparked by exposure to the internet.
However, we COULD see sporadic bursts of chaos, which could spark more chaos, which the Chinese government would certainly want to avoid. Their country is developing, and frankly, at an amazing rate. Too much change, too fast, could be catastrophic for that development, and within reason, I think it should be controlled by the Chinese, not the West. We often seem to fail to understand what makes us tick, let alone others.
Posting Permissions
Submit Your Article
Forum Rules
Reply With Quote
