The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
Chinese Communist Party Elders Call for Reform
DarkCrawler
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11529920
The Demands are:
Dismantle system where media organisations are all tied to higher authorities
Respect journalists, accept their social status
Revoke ban on cross-province supervision by public opinion
Abolish cyber-police; control Web administrators' ability to delete/post items at will
Confirm citizens' right to know crimes and mistakes committed by ruling party
Launch pilot projects to support citizen-owned media organisations
Allow media and publications from Hong Kong and Macau to be openly distributed
Change the mission of propaganda authorities, from preventing the leak of information to facilitating its accurate and timely spread
Anyone think anything will come out of this? Big calls for change are already few and far between, and they are even rarer coming from Communist Party members, especially influential ones. While I don't think any of these guys are in charge anymore, this is still pretty big, especially when combined with the recent Nobel Peace Prize uproar which probably has the Party on it's toes.
I guess this could be general discussion about China's human rights as well. Will the next generation of leadership change it? Do they have a choice with the standard of living and China's position in the world rising?
Chinese veteran politicians call for reform
A group of 23 Communist Party elders in China has written a letter calling for an end to the country's restrictions on freedom of speech.
The letter says freedom of expression is promised in the Chinese constitution but not allowed in practice.
They want people to be able to freely express themselves on the internet and want more respect for journalists.
The call comes just days after the Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded this year's Nobel Peace Prize.
Mr Liu was sent to prison for 11 years in 2009 for expressing his desire to see peaceful political change in China.
The letter's release also comes ahead of a key party meeting that is expected to promote future leaders and shape policy for the next few years.
Specific demands
The authors of the letter describe China's current censorship system as a scandal and an embarrassment.
Many who signed the letter were once influential officials.
One author is a former personal secretary to the revolutionary leader Mao Zedong and a former editor of the official People's Daily newspaper.
They make eight specific demands - all designed to enhance Chinese people's right to express themselves in public.
They say people who lived in Hong Kong while it was still a British colony enjoyed more freedom than is currently allowed in mainland China.
The letter is addressed to the National People's Congress, China's parliament.
It was widely available on the internet - although it has already been taken down from many websites.
The Demands are:
Dismantle system where media organisations are all tied to higher authorities
Respect journalists, accept their social status
Revoke ban on cross-province supervision by public opinion
Abolish cyber-police; control Web administrators' ability to delete/post items at will
Confirm citizens' right to know crimes and mistakes committed by ruling party
Launch pilot projects to support citizen-owned media organisations
Allow media and publications from Hong Kong and Macau to be openly distributed
Change the mission of propaganda authorities, from preventing the leak of information to facilitating its accurate and timely spread
Anyone think anything will come out of this? Big calls for change are already few and far between, and they are even rarer coming from Communist Party members, especially influential ones. While I don't think any of these guys are in charge anymore, this is still pretty big, especially when combined with the recent Nobel Peace Prize uproar which probably has the Party on it's toes.
I guess this could be general discussion about China's human rights as well. Will the next generation of leadership change it? Do they have a choice with the standard of living and China's position in the world rising?
DarkCrawler on
0
Posts
On the other hand if China can get their shit together maybe they can do better than the US at leading the world.
I hope something comes of it, and it sounds like a pretty big deal, but I'm not going to hold my breath on any real reform considering their letter is already being censored.
I don't see how making his coffee and running a newspaper that has no competition distinguishes you very much.
I'm not sure who else is in on this, but it's not going to get anywhere unless someone with real clout backs it.
which I doubt will happen; restricting freedoms makes your job considerably easier.
oh, and before anyone else goes for the obvious joke- is this story getting coverage in the chinese media?
Some of the signatories have more influence than others, obviously.
I can see the PRC operating on a strict version of the so-called "legal responsibility" framework for a long time; note that (for example) Singapore operates along those formal lines. Legal transparency still permits a government to (transparently and systematically) insist that it has a "right of reply" to any published criticism, or that publishers and authors are both liable for any defamation in their publications - the newspaper is not just a neutral party republishing someone else's allegations. And, of course, by "defamation" we can put the burden of evidence on the author and publisher to prove that the allegations are factually true; otherwise the allegations may be deemed as damaging and the author and publisher ordered to pay recompense.
Legal responsibility is not the same as a free press, at least not in the way "free press" is understood in the West.
Depends on the implimentation - if its the provincial governments that are going lose the powers whilst the central government keeps theirs then it might happen. Both Beijing and the chinese people see the local administrators as corrupt arseholes that need to be kept in check, and a lot of these seem like their for local accountability only.
As it stands, the Beijing Government of today is probably the most lenient in the area of political liberty that has existed in the majority of China...in...forever. Any more lenient government probably just couldn't enforce its intentions. 70, 80 years ago, people were shot in the outright for the line they skirt around today.
The central government will probably take some of the recommendations into consideration so much as they reinforce their own position socially, if not legally (you know, like any government remotely interested in its own survival).
Heck, hasn't China been like that for pretty much its entire history?
The Singapore model is realistic for PRC.
That said, journalism in Singapore is a fucking joke.
Pretty much what I was thinking.
Both? I mean, it seems that one comes with the other.
Singapore seems to be the go-to model for authoritarian governments everywhere now, it seems. It's not just the PRC; Dubai and Rwanda's leaders have described themselves pursuing the idea.
Deng Xiaoping was a fan, to be sure, although Jiang and now Hu seem to be less enthusiastic. To be sure, here are enough similarities in their histories for Singapore to seem appealing - as a culturally Chinese right-wing state exercising power via a grip on formerly left-wing social institutions, the de facto social bargain of providing economic growth in return for compliance - but enough differences. Deng underestimated the pace of growth and now the PRC is too developed to have to resort to engineering numerous Hong Kong clones to generate prosperity. And the PRC is, of course, huge, while Singapore is tiny, with all the attendant differences.
Not likely, I think. I daresay that some of these are highly-placed enough to be put under house arrest, at worst.
But who knows.
Free speech/media censorship.
You're free to say whatever you want, mostly free to read and watch whatever you want (some books like Satanic Verses are banned, as is porn, but nothing's enforced beyond prohibiting stores from carrying them)
But as soon as you make the slightest nuisance, you'll be taken to court, charged with slander and likely bankrupted while the government run news media runs a comprehensive character assassination campaign.
It's certainly more humane, and probably more efficient than China's all out pre-emptive approach.
its hard for any government anywhere to relinquish any kind of control. period.
Like, ever. At least culturally.
Ill be a little more clear. This idea of free speech is a tad hard for a people that have never really exercised it in their history in any way shape or form. I am hopeful that a new generation of Chinese can spearhead some change, especially with the advent of globalization and liberalizing attitudes from within China itself.
Except from what ive read in books like China Road, the youth in China are looking towards a mingling of what China is currently doing with western democracy and human rights. A blend, really.
XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
South Africa too, and it could be argued that the South African white elites had more to lose than the Chinese elites since they were handing over power to a completely different ethnic group that had every reason to hate their guts.
I dunno. China's still not great regarding individual freedoms compared to most of the West, but they've slowly allowed for increased freedom and are way, way better compared to three or four decades ago. And for all the oppression they've caused I honestly believe it's (mostly) been for the sake of a stronger China, not for the sake of oppression. Even if their methods have been ridiculously shortsighted at times.
Ehhhhh. I'd say a number of things have changed. A lot of their cultural mainstays can really be found throughout the East. But there are a lot of cultural changes that you see happen with urbanization. People that have grown up in cities as only children are showing preferences towards smaller families. Childless couples have become more common too. There's even a raised concern about the lack of emphasis of community these days, but I don't know how much of that is real and how much is just old people disappointed in kids these days. There is, however, an up tick in people moving away from past traditions like going home and eating in for New Years and such.
Also, almost every dynasty marked a significant change in certain cultural values.
Edit: Though this is all before your own edit which I agree with.
This is correct.
Many dynastic emperors have done exactly that for the same reason.
XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
Incidentally, you've just summarized the movie Hero.
In its entirety
if they do change, it won't be because they give a fuck about what anyone else thinks.
They buy their shit?
Overseas Chinese communities have historically proven culturally malleable to an extraordinary extent, but I don't know about Chinese in their own homeland.
There's something of a conflict of values.
On the one hand, face is still remarkably important to the Chinese going by what I've been exposed to. They don't like to look foolish, backwards, outdated, etc.
On the other hand, traditional cultural values are also still very important to them but some of them come in to conflict with the modern world and can get heavy criticism from other countries that they often seem to simultaneously put on a pedestal/insist has should keep their opinions to themselves because they don't understand Chinese culture. To a degree they want the perks brought about by certain Western values but without it replacing any of theirs since, historically, theirs have always been the best as far as China has been concerned.
Again, the modernization and opening of China to the rest of the world has lessened the latter and like all cultures neither of those are a hard and fast rule for every Chinese person or community.
Both excellent critiques of Communist China/Confucian China. And talks about the identity crisis we're discussing here.
XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
Probably easier to read the books though.
Underlying that is a (not new) attempt to recharacterize 'excessive' political freedom as weakness, lack of moral fiber, laziness, etc.
When this happens in Singapore - well, who cares? It's just a city. Its culture is more influenced by Hollywood and US media than its own local media networks. But the PRC is huge - a full sixth of the world population.
The Taiwanese teachers may also not give a crap. Or they might care too much.
Books offer greater consistency.
I'm not convinced that a China that is more liberalized than it is now but less liberalized than a lot of countries wouldn't be ideal. So... depending on where "part of the way" is, I don't know that we should be too concerned.
I think that in China, especially with the younger generations, people are choosing to put up with bullshit, know that all kinds of things are being kept from them in all kinds of ways. Everyone uses censorship-bypassing programs anyway, so they can't be forced to live in the state approved version of reality.
I'm not sure that that's "more brainwashed", I think it's more along the lines of simply having fewer and less obvious controls placed on them.
All states offer a breed of oppression. Isn't the ideal to not experience any in daily life?
Perhaps brainwashed in terms of the average young Singaporean having grown up in a culture of absolutely nil dissent. I've yet to meet a Singaporean with any political interest whatsoever - their concerns, such as they are, focus on improving their situation within the existing framework rather than changing the framework itself.
Because of the lack of dissent, and because of how carefully controlled information is, any instances of governmental oppression will generate minimal outrage, and this rather dangerously makes anti-government figures 1) apparently railing against nothing important, and 2) a threat to the status quo that leaves the majority moderately well-off and safe.
But I'm not sure this approach can work in China until the majority of people are well-off and safe, which is a long-way off indeed. Singapore works because the vast majority of the population are unquestioning and uninterested in changing their lives, but the vast range of conditions and lifestyle in China means that a commonly-accepted status quo for both Peasants and Bankers is going to be near-impossible to reach.