People's Republic of China Nov 22, 2009

amit · Post by **amit** » 09 Dec 2010 08:08

Lalmohan wrote:by urging a boycott china is throwing its toys out of the pram and behaving like a spoilt brat
(which is unsurprising for a nation of single children not used to having siblings)
besides which, the peace prize is one of many given out by the Nobel institute

Actually the Chinese reaction to Liu Xiaobo's Nobel is a welcome sign as far as the world is concerned. It shows that behind the facade of smart suits, hand waving and smiling faces, the Chinese leadership is as paranoid as before. And immature to boot. Far less dangerous than mature, calculating dictatorship bent on becoming a world hegemon.

There was another report a few months ago which seems to have slipped under the radar here. This was about how China desperately tryed to suppress a routine UN report which found several dozens of made in China bullet casing in Darfur. Now the interesting point is all the report said was that China seems to be not doing enough to prevent arms leakage from Khartoum to Darfur - it did not claim that the Chinese were selling arms directly to the warring parties in Darfur. The other interesting part of the report was that it also mentioned that Russian origin arms were also found.

Now as I said this was just a routine UN report which would have been buried in heaps of other reports. And the Russians didn't even give a reaction. However, by trying to block the report the Chinese, in their version of LaWhori logic, made sure that major news outlets picked it up and reported it in such a way that it seemed that only Chinese arms were found in Darfor. Notice the BBC report which I linked.

In Liu Xiaobo's case a mature reaction would have been to issue a statement condemning the prize and then not make any statement, move at all. The uber chanakian move, of course would have been to let Liu go and collect the prize in Oslo but that would be too radical for the poor children of Mao.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 09 Dec 2010 08:26

China is coming out with its own version of Nobel Peace prize...

May we recommend Prakash Karat and Kishen'ji' for the medal? It can be presented by Arundati Roy or N. Ram...unless they decline because they are on panel of judges...

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Dec 2010 10:24

China is attempting to create a Trishanku Swarglok like sage Vishwamitra. Create a new World Order.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 09 Dec 2010 11:02

Why New Delhi snubbed Beijing on Peace Nobel

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 09 Dec 2010 11:08

There is no point in appeasing PRC. Not clear what India would have got in return for boycotting the Nobel Prize ceremony. How can such a thing be of such great importance to PRC? The question is why is India unilaterally offering concessions to Huawei inspite of security implications. What is the point of whining after that?

As the Jyoti Malhotra article says India was delaying the decision so that it could appraise what it could get from Jiabao's visit. The fact that they have decided to attend the ceremony shows that not much can be expected from the trip. In any case, China talks soft when it sees India getting close to US. But the underlying intent to pin down India through hook or crook is constant.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Dec 2010 12:19

Guys,

Lets hold on the self conguratulations until after the pi$$ awards are handed and see the the Indians are present. Then conguralate the GOI.

As it is said, there is many a slip.............

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Dec 2010 14:15

Wen Jiabao brings to India the largest trade delegation ever

Premier Wen Jiabao will be accompanied by the biggest ever Chinese trade delegation to India when he touches down in New Delhi next Wednesday on a three-day visit, during which the two countries’ fast-growing but increasingly imbalanced trade relationship will be in focus.

As of Wednesday, more than 250 representatives from 100 Chinese companies, in sectors ranging from manufacturing and banking to Information Technology, had confirmed their participation in next week’s visit.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 09 Dec 2010 14:23

Nihat wrote:Why New Delhi snubbed Beijing on Peace Nobel

Latest speech from Nirupama Rao, Foreign Sec., gave a indication of the direction in which way GoI might be moving.

Simple messg is, if we have respect your sensitives better you do start respecting sensitives on Kashmir etc.

If there is any reversal in stand from GoI, it will be on the grounds of China accepting to treat Kashmir as part of India.

shyam · Post by **shyam** » 09 Dec 2010 14:39

Kanson wrote:If there is any reversal in stand from GoI, it will be on the grounds of China accepting to treat Kashmir as part of India.

Please include COK too.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Dec 2010 14:50

Guys,

Just imagin the gains the PRC has made without making any real consessions to India.

1st they creat a $hit stom in a tea cup getting Indian dhoties in a twist.
2nd they will make a meaningless consession to India and claim to be reasonable power. With the Yindus accepting and obliging the PRC.

Net gainer PRC by getting India to do what it wants. Even as the Yndians celebrate the Chanikyanness of their approach whereby the PRC accepted that J&K is an integeral part of Yndia.

Please step back and think about it.

Now, if we were reaching an accomodation with the PRC it would be a diffrent matter but we are not. Any concession to the PRC ATM will be an act of apaesment. Regardless of how it is sold to the aam janta.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Dec 2010 17:16

China reiterates call to India to boycott Nobel ceremony

The Chinese government on Thursday reiterated its call for countries to boycott Friday’s Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, though refrained from saying whether India’s expected attendance would have any impact on bilateral relations.

“I think developing country to country relations should follow certain principles,” {Look who is talking} Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu said, when asked about India’s likely attendance at the awarding of the prize to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo, a political activist who is currently serving a 11-year jail term.

“We are of the view that countries, on the basis of mutual respect, equal treatment and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs have, dialogue and cooperation,” she said, adding that these were “basic norms governing international relations.”

Ms. Jiang declined to say if India’s decision to attend Friday’s ceremony would have any impact on ties, only stating that China hoped that countries which had received invitations “can tell right from wrong” and “uphold justice.”

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 09 Dec 2010 17:19

Our response should be to ask china to accept Tibet as an independent country

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Dec 2010 18:16

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20101208 ... 8851c9d37e

China and its Double-edged Cyber-sword
By Sean Noonan | December 9, 2010
A recent batch of WikiLeaks cables led Der Spiegel and The New York Times to print front-page stories on China’s cyber-espionage capabilities Dec. 4 and 5. While China’s offensive capabilities on the Internet are widely recognized, the country is discovering the other edge of the sword.
China is no doubt facing a paradox as it tries to manipulate and confront the growing capabilities of Internet users. Recent arrests of Chinese hackers and People’s Liberation Army (PLA) pronouncements suggest that China fears that its own computer experts, nationalist hackers and social media could turn against the government. While the exact cause of Beijing’s new focus on network security is unclear, it comes at a time when other countries are developing their own defenses against cyber attacks and hot topics like Stuxnet and WikiLeaks are generating new concerns about Internet security......

(more in the link)

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 09 Dec 2010 20:40

‘China project to divert Bramhaputra river’
http://www.zeenews.com/news673252.html

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 09 Dec 2010 21:12

The sheer arrogance of the Chinese is mind numbing but hey the more they behave like this the faster our old leaders eyes will open.

It looks like only Japan, South Korea and India are the major Asian countries.

Hmm excellent

Tamang · Post by **Tamang** » 09 Dec 2010 21:19

Avinash R wrote:'China blocked UN sanctions on 3 Pak terrorists'

SSridhar wrote:China demands India not to attend the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony

Why we MUST attend Nobel Peace prize ceremony this time

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 10 Dec 2010 01:28

China stood up at Nobel Peace Prize rival ceremony: winner fails to show up
China stood up by winner of 'Confucius peace prize'

It was meant to be China's answer to the Nobel Peace Prize, a timely riposte to the honoring of jailed dissident Liu Xiaobo. But the winner of the first "Confucius Peace Prize" didn't even bother to show up.

Instead, it was left to a scared-looking girl, whom organizers did not properly identify, to collect a stack of bills for the $15,000 cash prize meant for former Taiwan vice-president Lien Chan.

Lien had won the prize for his efforts to improve relations between China and Taiwan, the self-ruled island Beijing claims as its own, beating out five other nominees, including past Nobel Peace Prize winners Mahmoud Abbas and Nelson Mandela.

"We believe that Mr. Lien Chan, with his knowledge, dignity, and political wisdom, would not refuse peace, and he would not refuse this prize," Confucius Prize organizer Tan Changliu gamely told a packed news conference in Beijing.

Lien, now honorary chairman of Taiwan's ruling Nationalist or KMT party, has not commented publicly on the prize.

Lai Shin-yuan, chairwoman of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, told Taiwan lawmakers that the island's government found the prize "amusing."

"As far as we know it is an unofficial prize. We don't plan to make any comment on it," she said. "But we do find it amusing."

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Dec 2010 06:47

Suraj wrote:China stood up at Nobel Peace Prize rival ceremony: winner fails to show up
China stood up by winner of 'Confucius peace prize'

An appropriate ending to an idiotic reaction. Egg on China's face here.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 10 Dec 2010 07:03

Nirupama Rao diplospeak:

We believe the India-China relationship will grow even stronger as China shows more sensitivity on core issues that impinge on our sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Everyone knows that this has zero chance of happening and that is perhaps why GoI has quietly maneuvered Tibet back into the equation. What GoI is really saying IMO, is that India reserves the right to do unto Tibet as China does unto J&K. That is extremely powerful stuff when one considers that India has quietly maintained a thousands-strong Tibetan commando force and posted it on the border with Tibet while issuing de facto Tibetan passports for decades. For it to now bring that out into the open is a major turning point and signals an aggressive approach from which there is no turning back. The interesting question is exactly why we are sticking it to the chinese now.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 10 Dec 2010 08:25

Communist China on Mosque-Building Spree

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 10 Dec 2010 09:50

India's snub to China deserves a bow - B.Raman
Excerpts

Strict reciprocity should be the rule in our relations with China. If it ignores our sensitivities in matters of vital interest to us, there is no reason why we should be unnecessarily responsive to its concerns in relation to Tibet.

The time has come for us to reconsider the existing restrictions on political interactions with the Dalai Lama. While our foreign secretaries have been periodically calling on the Dalai Lama, there are practically no interactions between him and our political leaders -- from the prime minister downwards.

The time has come to give up this policy and hold periodic interactions with the Dalai Lama not only in his capacity as a religious leader on religious issues, but also in his capacity as a political leader on the political situation in Tibet.

It is also time to associate him in some capacity with the project for the revival of the Nalanda Univerity. We need not be unduly worried about the sensitivities of Singapore and other countries helping in the project. If they withdraw, it does not matter.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Dec 2010 09:53

China now equated with Nazi Germany! Shows the world how to shoot yourself in the both feet and the mouth at the same time with one bullet!

Liu Xiaobo wins Nobel: China loses face with boycott of peace prize
Despite its bullying behaviour, the country has become freer, argues Peter Foster.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... prize.html

At a time when the international community is nervously wondering whether China will become a “responsible stakeholder” in world affairs – think of its recent refusal to condemn North Korean aggression or its increasingly muscular approach to global trade – the country has allowed itself to be directly compared to Nazi Germany, the last regime to stop a Nobel peace laureate from collecting the prize.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Dec 2010 10:06

Philip wrote:China now equated with Nazi Germany! Shows the world how to shoot yourself in the both feet and the mouth at the same time with one bullet!

Liu Xiaobo wins Nobel: China loses face with boycott of peace prize
Despite its bullying behaviour, the country has become freer, argues Peter Foster.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... prize.html

At a time when the international community is nervously wondering whether China will become a “responsible stakeholder” in world affairs – think of its recent refusal to condemn North Korean aggression or its increasingly muscular approach to global trade – the country has allowed itself to be directly compared to Nazi Germany, the last regime to stop a Nobel peace laureate from collecting the prize.

I think many Western journalists are missing the point. The Chinese government's first and foremost concern is with its own citizens, and what they've done are aimed at saving face in front of the domestic audience. Many Chinese people would greatly appreciate more human rights, but it'll be hard to find any Chinese person who'd root for a man like Liu, who advocates for "300 years of colonialism" of China in the hand of Western nations. To not act strongly and even overbearingly against an award handed out to a perceived traitor is political suicide for the CCP, and overreaction such as calling the Chinese Nazis will only strengthen Chinese people's feelings of "us vs. them" and strengthen the CCP rule in China.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Dec 2010 11:51

david,

That is exactly the point. Flout the rules of behavioure and when faced with a push back use it ot highten the sense of alianation from the international community amongst the people.

Claim the teritories of other nations saying that they were under the control of one Chiies dynesty or the other. Ignore the modern national boundries. When faced with a push back. Raise the alianation amongst your own population.

This exactly how the Nazi germany behaved in the 1930s. This how the PRC is behaving today. And people who compare the two are missing the point Mr CCP Drone. Truly amazing............

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 10 Dec 2010 12:22

PRC : All u chinese belong to us

Beijing detains Oz national on way to peace prize party http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 063137.cms
SHANGHAI: An ethnic Chinese Australian national has said police detained him for 24 hours at Shanghai's airport and forced him to return home in a bid to block him from attending on Friday's Nobel peace prize ceremony.

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 10 Dec 2010 13:19

China clamps down on dissidents, media ahead of Nobel http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 075251.cms

amit · Post by **amit** » 10 Dec 2010 13:23

DavidD wrote:I think many Western journalists are missing the point. The Chinese government's first and foremost concern is with its own citizens, and what they've done are aimed at saving face in front of the domestic audience. Many Chinese people would greatly appreciate more human rights, but it'll be hard to find any Chinese person who'd root for a man like Liu, who advocates for "300 years of colonialism" of China in the hand of Western nations. To not act strongly and even overbearingly against an award handed out to a perceived traitor is political suicide for the CCP, and overreaction such as calling the Chinese Nazis will only strengthen Chinese people's feelings of "us vs. them" and strengthen the CCP rule in China.

David,

You should learn the game of cricket under the able patronage of China's taller than mountains, deeper than seas friend who are know in these parts as the Terrorist Republic of Pakistan. There's an art form in cricket called spin bowling; you've guessed it, this involves imparting spin to the 12 oz leather ball which is used to play cricket. Since you're a past master at spinning everything you'd be a natural - why you could even try to master the Chinaman, a very interesting variation of spin.

Coming back to Liu. He's a guy the ordinary person on the streets in Beijing didn't even know about, let alone folks in New York, London, New Delhi or even BRF. Since 1989 his name has been expunged from the ordinary discourse within China.

However, thanks to the great CPC leadership's tactical brilliance he's become a worldwide celebrity. Now however way you may try to spin that you can't hide the central fact that all your smiling, hand waving (a good aping of the US leadership) and smart suited leaders are nothing but old style dictators who are shit scared of losing power. He's going to become a symbol of freedom much like Aung San Suu Kyi, another person whom a brute regime did not allow to collect the Nobel Peace Prize.

The only mentions of Liu in the Chinese media have been in terms of him being a criminal, gangster, a one man army which can bring down the PLA etc. In such a situation one may ask you a simple question: Where did you get that piece of news that he advocated 300 years of colonialism for China? I really hope you didn't get it from the People's Daily?

Sorry bro but you're bull shitting will be called out here. Liu came to fame during the Tienanmen Square events where your glorious army showed its true colors by turning on its own citizens with tanks and that too in the capital. All he's done is ask for democracy and the rights of ordinary Chinese. It's telling that the all powerful Communist Party is so terrified of an ordinary citizen who has no political power, no visibility in the media (including the Internet) and who's spend most of his time in detention since 1989. A chap who could walk down the streets of Beijing without anyone recognizing him.

Says a lot doesn't it? If you indeed live abroad in some western country, please look yourself in the mirror and think for a moment what you're trying to justify. It's alright, you don't have to make a confession to us but talk to yourself. You'd be surprised at what you see and hear.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Dec 2010 14:53

amit wrote:
DavidD wrote:I think many Western journalists are missing the point. The Chinese government's first and foremost concern is with its own citizens, and what they've done are aimed at saving face in front of the domestic audience. Many Chinese people would greatly appreciate more human rights, but it'll be hard to find any Chinese person who'd root for a man like Liu, who advocates for "300 years of colonialism" of China in the hand of Western nations. To not act strongly and even overbearingly against an award handed out to a perceived traitor is political suicide for the CCP, and overreaction such as calling the Chinese Nazis will only strengthen Chinese people's feelings of "us vs. them" and strengthen the CCP rule in China.
David,

You should learn the game of cricket under the able patronage of China's taller than mountains, deeper than seas friend who are know in these parts as the Terrorist Republic of Pakistan. There's an art form in cricket called spin bowling; you've guessed it, this involves imparting spin to the 12 oz leather ball which is used to play cricket. Since you're a past master at spinning everything you'd be a natural - why you could even try to master the Chinaman, a very interesting variation of spin.

Coming back to Liu. He's a guy the ordinary person on the streets in Beijing didn't even know about, let alone folks in New York, London, New Delhi or even BRF. Since 1989 his name has been expunged from the ordinary discourse within China.

However, thanks to the great CPC leadership's tactical brilliance he's become a worldwide celebrity. Now however way you may try to spin that you can't hide the central fact that all your smiling, hand waving (a good aping of the US leadership) and smart suited leaders are nothing but old style dictators who are shit scared of losing power. He's going to become a symbol of freedom much like Aung San Suu Kyi, another person whom a brute regime did not allow to collect the Nobel Peace Prize.

The only mentions of Liu in the Chinese media have been in terms of him being a criminal, gangster, a one man army which can bring down the PLA etc. In such a situation one may ask you a simple question: Where did you get that piece of news that he advocated 300 years of colonialism for China? I really hope you didn't get it from the People's Daily?

Sorry bro but you're bull shitting will be called out here. Liu came to fame during the Tienanmen Square events where your glorious army showed its true colors by turning on its own citizens with tanks and that too in the capital. All he's done is ask for democracy and the rights of ordinary Chinese. It's telling that the all powerful Communist Party is so terrified of an ordinary citizen who has no political power, no visibility in the media (including the Internet) and who's spend most of his time in detention since 1989. A chap who could walk down the streets of Beijing without anyone recognizing him.

Says a lot doesn't it? If you indeed live abroad in some western country, please look yourself in the mirror and think for a moment what you're trying to justify. It's alright, you don't have to make a confession to us but talk to yourself. You'd be surprised at what you see and hear.

Look, you need to get your facts straight first, and then get back to me. Here are some facts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Xiaobo ... e-open1-12

In a 1988 interview with Hong Kong's Liberation Monthly (now known as Open Magazine), Liu was asked what it would take for China to realize a true historical transformation. He replied in this way: "(It would take) 300 years of colonialism. In 100 years of colonialism, Hong Kong has changed to what we see today. With China being so big, of course it would take 300 years of colonialism for it to be able to transform into how Hong Kong is today. I have my doubts as to whether 300 years would be enough."[13] Liu admitted in 2006 that the response was extemporaneous, although he did not intend to take it back. The quote was nonetheless used against him. He has commented, "Even today [in 2006], patriotic 'angry youth' still frequently use these words to paint me with 'treason."[13]

Extemporaneous? Yea, that'll get you off the hook.

Just so we're sure that it's not taken out of context, here's the full interview in Chinese and my translation of that part of the interview:

http://lkcn.net/bbs/index.php?showtopic=236135

　问：中国可能在根本上加以改造吗?
　　刘晓波：不可能，即使一两个统治者下决心，也没办法，因为没有土壤。
　　问：那什么条件下，中国才有可能实现一个真正的历史变革呢?
　　刘晓波：三百年殖民地。香港一百年殖民地变成今天这样，中国那么大，当然需要三百年殖民地，才会变成今天香港这样，三百年够不够，我还有怀疑。
　　问：十足的：“卖国主义”啦。
　　刘晓波：我要引用马克思“***宣言”的一句话：“工人没有祖国，决不能剥夺他们所没有的东西。”我无所谓爱国、叛国，你要说我叛国，我就叛国!就承认自己是挖祖坟的不孝子孙，且以此为荣。
　　问：你是说，中国还要走香港的路?
　　刘晓波：但历史不会再给中国人这样的机会了，殖民地时代已经过去了，没人会愿意再背中国这个包袱。
　　问：那怎么办呢?岂不太令人悲观?
　　刘晓波：没办法。我对整个人类都是悲观的，但我的悲观主义并不逃避，即使摆在我面前的是一个又一个悲剧，我也要挣扎，也要对抗，我不喜欢叔本华而喜欢尼采，原因便在于此。

Interviewer: Can China fundamentally reform?
Liu: Impossible, even if one or two rulers have the will, it's still useless, there is no base.
Interviewer: Under what conditions, could China achieve a truly historic transformation?
Liu: 300 years of colonialism. Hong Kong was colonized for 100 years and it's like this now, China's so big, it would of course take 300 years of colonialism, before it can become today's Hong Kong, whether 300 years is enough, I'm still in doubt.
Interviewer: Full-on treacherous remarks, no?
Liu: Let me quote something from Marx's manifesto: "Workers have no country, you cannot take from them what they do not possess." I don't care about patriotism, treachery, if you say I'm a traitor, then I'm a traitor! I'll be the dishonorable son who digs up my ancestors' graves, and be proud of it.
Interviewer: So you're saying, that China should go Hong Kong's route?
Liu: But history won't give the Chinese people another opportunity like this, the time of colonialism has past, nobody will be willing to carry the burden that is China.
Interviewer: Then what? Isn't this too pessimistic?
Liu: No use. I have a pessimistic view of the entire human species, but my pessimism doesn't run away, even if what's in front of me is one tragedy after another, I'll still struggle, I'll still fight, I don't like Schopenhauer but I like Nietzsche, and this is the reason.

In addition, the two most prominent human rights organizations Liu was a part of was funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, a private, non-government American group(sounds good so far)...that is mostly funded by the U.S. Congress.

http://www.theatlantic.com/internationa ... lem/64916/

The other is the "foreign paymasters" criticism: revelations that Liu has indirectly received money from the US government. Indirect chain of payment: The National Endowment for Democracy is a private, non-governmental group in the US, but it gets most of its money via the US Congress. The NED gives grants to many hundreds of private pro-civil-society groups around the world. Among these are Independent Chinese PEN Center and Democratic China magazine; Liu has been president of the first and editor of the second, and has received NED funding in those capacities. Indeed, just after his selection, the NED had an announcement expressing congratulations to Liu as its "grantee." That page no longer turns up on the NED's site, but the cached version is here (and a mention of it here, with now-broken link). [Update: a NED official has sent in a currently functioning link, here, to the release.]

Now, tell me, Mr. Amit, how else would the Chinese people view a man who doesn't believe that China can obtain human rights, is paid by the U.S. government, and advocates centuries of Chinese colonization at the hands of western nations?

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 10 Dec 2010 15:18

PRC : All u chinese belong to us

http://www.hindustantimes.com/China-s-i ... 36525.aspx

Norway's Chinese community were being pressured by Chinese diplomats to attend anti-Nobel protests planned for Friday, and had been threatened with retaliation if they failed to appear.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Dec 2010 15:22

Also, just to note, he isn't jailed just for making comments like that. After all, he made those comments back in 1988 and he wasn't locked up for 12 years. He was jailed for being paid by the NED(according to the rumor on the James Fallows site, $650,000) to incite anti-government movements. Being paid by foreign governments to undermine his own government understandably qualifies as "subversion of government", the charge over which he was convicted and jailed. Nevertheless, I don't believe that he should've been jailed, but I suppose since I can see things from a Chinese perspective, I do see one silver lining. That is, someone like him would've been executed already in the '70s, that he hasn't been jailed until he became a much greater tool(pun intended) of the western world with his Nobel prize is already a testament of how far China has come in terms of human rights and specifically the freedom of speech.

amit · Post by **amit** » 10 Dec 2010 15:29

^^^^^^^

David Bhai,

Is that all you could muster? You know you contradict yourself by publishing the exact quotes of what Liu told Open.

Now this is what the editor of Open who did interview, Jin Zhong has to say about that quote about 300 years of colonialism:

When Liu visited Hong Kong for the first time in 1988, he was impressed by the freedom and wealth of the then British colony, remembers Jin. When Jin asked Liu how China should develop in the future, Liu answered somewhat ironically: "China needs at least 300 years of colonialism, if Hong Kong has needed 100 years for this kind of freedom and prosperity."

"Of course he was exaggerating," recalls Jin, "Liu has been a strong supporter of Western-style democracy and freedom."

Still, Liu's quote has been widely discussed within the Chinese internet community. Patriotic users are upset, whereas their critics wonder why the Chinese cadres are sending their offspring abroad to study in Western countries, if they are so negative about the West. {Now, Now David Bhai, of course this is not directed at CCP drones like you who live in the West!}

So you and the CPC base your entire argument on something which was said figuratively by Liu. You know what? If that's the criteria, then half the BRF folks you see posting here would be behind bars in India. Maybe that's the big difference between the Middle Kingdom and India? Something which democratic Chinese like Liu yearn for?

Here's more proof of the deep conspiracy that Liu has initiated with US backing to destroy the peaceful lives of the people of the Middle Kingdom:

In 2008, Liu Xiaobo was one of the initiators of the so-called Charter '08 – a manifesto demanding more democracy and freedom within China. Two days before it was published, Liu was arrested and later sentenced to eleven years in prison on subversion charges.

"As co-initiator, Liu has gathered over ten thousand supporters for the Charter '08 within a short period. No one else within the divided pro-democracy movement can be as convincing as Liu. He is the only one who can mobilize so many people," explains Qian

Folks read the entire link I posted. Also, if interested read this very nice Economist article.

David, like I said if you post bull shit, it will be called out.

Cheers!

amit · Post by **amit** » 10 Dec 2010 15:35

DavidD wrote:Also, just to note, he isn't jailed just for making comments like that. After all, he made those comments back in 1988 and he wasn't locked up for 12 years. He was jailed for being paid by the NED(according to the rumor on the James Fallows site, $650,000) to incite anti-government movements. Being paid by foreign governments to undermine his own government understandably qualifies as "subversion of government", the charge over which he was convicted and jailed. Nevertheless, I don't believe that he should've been jailed, but I suppose since I can see things from a Chinese perspective, I do see one silver lining. That is, someone like him would've been executed already in the '70s, that he hasn't been jailed until he became a much greater tool(pun intended) of the western world with his Nobel prize is already a testament of how far China has come in terms of human rights and specifically the freedom of speech.

So based on what a journalist from The Atlantic allegedly wrote the Chinese government put him behind bars?

Wow man you guys put more importance on what US says that even Pakistan. Again another piece of bullshit. He was put behind bars because of Charter '08.

Also I do note the downhill skiing being done by you regarding the 300 years of colonialism comment.

In your first post you wrote:

Many Chinese people would greatly appreciate more human rights, but it'll be hard to find any Chinese person who'd root for a man like Liu, who advocates for "300 years of colonialism" of China in the hand of Western nations.

I repeat what I wrote in the first place. Before this tamasha, the ordinary Chinese in Mainland China didn't know anything about Liu. His name has been systematically blacked out since 1989. The idea he is a threat is the figment of the imagination of a paranoid dictatorship.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Dec 2010 16:10

You're clearly agitated that I called you out on your ignorance of the "300 years of colonialism" comment made by Liu, I'll let you cool down a bit first.

For the record, I don't believe that Liu should've been jailed, and I, along with most Chinese people, DO believe that more freedom is needed in China. I'm simply explaining why the Chinese people view him as a traitor. Isn't there a guy named A. Roy(can't remember his full name, but a Naxal supporter apparently) in India that everybody on this board hates and thinks is a traitor? He's not jailed as far as I know, and kudos to India for that. I hope China can follow the example, but I certainly don't hope that many will take up Liu's message of achieving that by being slaves of the western world.

MChandraSekhar · Post by **MChandraSekhar** » 10 Dec 2010 16:16

^^Um, forget jailing, China would have executed denizens like SuARni aka A.Roy(she is female). No comparison at all between the two.

amit · Post by **amit** » 10 Dec 2010 16:18

DavidD wrote:You're clearly agitated that I called you out on your ignorance of the "300 years of colonialism" comment made by Liu, I'll let you cool down a bit first.

David,

I must admit you have a great sense of humor!

For the record, I don't believe that Liu should've been jailed, and I, along with most Chinese people, DO believe that more freedom is needed in China. I'm simply explaining why the Chinese people view him as a traitor.

Then what's the problem?

Isn't there a guy named A. Roy(can't remember his full name, but a Naxal supporter apparently) in India that everybody on this board hates and thinks is a traitor? He's not jailed as far as I know, and kudos to India for that. I hope China can follow the example, but I certainly don't hope that many will take up Liu's message of achieving that by being slaves of the western world.

It's not a guy, its a gal and a Booker Prize winner to boot. You know you're right that's the big difference between the two countries. Arundhati Roy can say Kashmir never belonged to India and that it should be allowed to break off from the Indian union in the heart of India's capital and still not be arrested. In case you don't understand the import of this, this is the same a someone making a speech in Tienanmen Square that Tibet should be independent and the Dalai Lama should be head of government.

Ultimately that's the difference between the Indiain govt and the Chinese govt (do note I state government and not people).

There's another even more important difference that the CCP doesn't get. And that is the reason why Liu gets the Nobel prize and is the centre of world attention and not Arundhati Roy is because of how they have been treated by their respective governments.

Regarding the point of being slaves of the west, again you don't get it. By it's very actions the CCP is ensuring that it is slaving for the West by being reactive and not proactive. The masterstroke which the west did was to award the prize to Liu. Do you think he would have got the prize if he had been free and roaming around in Beijing like Arundhati Roy is - who once said that she no longer considers herself as an India as she has ceded from India?

By understanding exactly how the CCP would react in a given situation, the West is simply manipulating, and CCP is obliging by its predictable and slavish reaction.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Dec 2010 16:22

Also, sir, it wasn't "allegedly". He DID receive money from the NED and the information was available online to the public until a couple of months ago:

http://thenewvoice.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... iu-xiaobo/

The NED has since taken it down, I wonder why?

amit · Post by **amit** » 10 Dec 2010 16:25

DavidD wrote:Also, sir, it wasn't "allegedly". He DID receive money from the NED and the information was available online to the public until a couple of months ago:

http://thenewvoice.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... iu-xiaobo/

The NED has since taken it down, I wonder why?

Receiving the money from NED is not the same as using it for subversive purposes.

But then I have to ask you, do you think the Charter '08 was subversive of the Chinese people or subversive of the CCP?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Dec 2010 16:27

David,

Freedom isnt free nor is it cheap. The lady Roy will be put behind bars for her sedicious remarks.

But asking for more freedom as in CHarter 08 is unfair. Liu has not called for the destruction of the chinies state. He has called for political liberalisation. Charter 08 has not even called for the removal of the CCP from power. All it has called for is for the masses to have more say and freedom. It is the CCP that has equated those statements as treason and put him behind bars.

That is the point of contention.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 10 Dec 2010 16:31

DavidD,
Liu's remarks cannot be compared to what A Roy (in this case a "she" and not a "he") said. It would have been comparable, if and only if Liu was saying something like "grant independence to the Uyghurs and allow them to secede from the current Chinese regime, because the Chinese government has grossly trampled upon their human rights and the Uyghurs should be allowed to exercise their right to self-determination". Additionally there would have to be well established proof of direct infilitration of terrorists who target innocent Chinese civilians, proof that Uyghurs actually were never really distinct from Chinese culture and civilization, belonged to the same ethnic and religious stock, and that plains Chinese had important cultural and religious centres from the beginnings of "plains Chinese" civilization in the land of the Uyghurs - which recently the Uyghurs have been destroying merrily.

Before making arbitrary comparisons, its wise to gather all the facts and much more than is necessary merely to score a debating point.

It is obvious that Lius' statements in this regard is qualitatively different,a nd moreover he is solidly within Marxist jargon and conceptual framework when he is saying this. There are page after page of Marxist writing, and even some by Mao and others from China, which undermine "national" identities. Some of the writings openly emphasize the role of "capitalist intervention" from the west in the transformation of non-western societies in the proper Marxist direction.

I guess, with the mythological reconstruction of Chinese history under the CCP, there is now a mythological wiping off of actual Marxist literature on the subject of nationhood and anationality and "modernization" and progress etc.

DavidD can you please search up on "oriental despotism" in Marxist writings by the gurus acknowledged even by the most die-hard Sinified Marxists of China? Liu's comments come across as solidly in tune with Marxist philosophy and position on this issue of the role of western style colonialism in transformation of "backward" and "oreiental despotic" societies like China.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 10 Dec 2010 16:40

amit wrote:
DavidD wrote:Also, sir, it wasn't "allegedly". He DID receive money from the NED and the information was available online to the public until a couple of months ago:

http://thenewvoice.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... iu-xiaobo/

The NED has since taken it down, I wonder why?
Receiving the money from NED is not the same as using it for subversive purposes.

But then I have to ask you, do you think the Charter '08 was subversive of the Chinese people or subversive of the CCP?

Subversive? Yes. To both. China isn't ready for what SOME of the things it calls for yet. However, I don't believe that subversive comments alone deserve a jail sentence. Being paid by a foreign power to make subversive comments is teetering on the borderline though. Even then, I don't think he should be jailed, because once the people find out that he's paid by foreign powers to say what he says, he instantly loses all credibility.

As for the A. Roy analogy, I think I got things mixed up a bit. I had no idea that she's even made comments re: Kashmir. I thought she was someone who advocated for better treatment of the poor while condoning the Naxalites' use of violence to achieve that goal. In that case, it would be, IMO, analogous to Liu's advocacy of greater freedom in China while condoning centuries of colonization at the hands of western powers. Good end, terrible means.