Welcome to China.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-06-2013, 02:35 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 02:08 PM)BryanS Wrote:  If a dissident advocated converting the US government to communism through amending our constitution, I doubt they'd get very far, but they certainly would not be arrested for advocating that.

I understand.

Theoretically it looks great.

In practice, I have the information from you, MSbB and others able to draw the conclusion that many cases indicate it is also done this way.

I still think that you can not eradicate prejudice against communists in the realm of free speech. But judging from what information you and others provide, such cases are definitely going to be of a minimum level.

But it still has boundaries. It is OK for Nazi free speech. It is OK for Communism free speech (me, here). But it is definitely not OK for terrorism sympathy free speech, I think.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes HU.Junyuan's post
15-06-2013, 02:39 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 02:18 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  I am not going to answer it.

What a shock someone puts forth a rational argument and you refuse to discuss that because it would mean admitting your government is not perfect. This right here is why I am losing respect for your opinion.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
15-06-2013, 02:43 PM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2013 03:06 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 02:26 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Hey Pot, Kettle's calling. He's on line 2.

It's painfully transparent that you are the one dodging, not me.

This is precisely the topic of discussion. I know you're not going to answer my question--I expected you wouldn't, thus making my point. This kind of discussion about Liu's statement of principles is precisely the kind of debate and discussion the Communist party in China does not want to have. They feel threatened by this kind of discussion, because they know that if people discuss these ideas, they might agree that these principles should be incorporated into their government.

Look, we both want this discussion to be meaningful, right?

You are not going to say, regardless of the truth, that every single principle in you extracted from Liu's Charter 08 totally doesn't exist in China, are you ?

So after all we will have to talk about the difference between the difference between reality and Charter 08, why and how to achieve it, won't we ?

What's the point of asking which principle I don't agree ? To let me pick an obvious wrong choice to win our little debate ? No, I think you are better for it.

Liu's missing the point I suggested is to avoid doing some really good to the Chinese people. And that is called cheap. And that is why this Mr. Liu is in jail and I am not going to miss him a bit.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2013, 02:45 PM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2013 02:49 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 02:39 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 02:18 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  I am not going to answer it.

What a shock someone puts forth a rational argument and you refuse to discuss that because it would mean admitting your government is not perfect. This right here is why I am losing respect for your opinion.

Why don't you have a little more patience with the ongoing discussion and not to jump to the conclusion in a hurry, in case you really have some respect, which I really doubt.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2013, 03:16 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 02:35 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 02:08 PM)BryanS Wrote:  If a dissident advocated converting the US government to communism through amending our constitution, I doubt they'd get very far, but they certainly would not be arrested for advocating that.

I understand.

Theoretically it looks great.

In practice, I have the information from you, MSbB and others able to draw the conclusion that many cases indicate it is also done this way.

I still think that you can not eradicate prejudice against communists in the realm of free speech. But judging from what information you and others provide, such cases are definitely going to be of a minimum level.

But it still has boundaries. It is OK for Nazi free speech. It is OK for Communism free speech (me, here). But it is definitely not OK for terrorism sympathy free speech, I think.

Actually, terrorist types can say all they want until they start talking about an actual plot to inflict harm. Islamic extremists can say all kinds of hateful things about the US, and they can do it right here in the US. Ever heard of the Nation of Islam? Reverend Farrakhan says some awful things about the US. He even cozies up with Islamic despots from time to time. Yet we don't arrest him--why? Because that's all it is. When an artist created a piece named, for literal reasons, "Piss Christ", it offended Christians, but you know what? Christian conservative whined and gnashed their teeth, but all they could do was that.

As I say, incitement to violence is the one exception to free speech and in order to rise to that level, it has to be a specific threat. Saying for instance "all Americans deserve to die" would be protected. Saying "My fellow terrorists, shoot the next infidel you see" would not be protected and would result in arrest. Heck, we even had left wingers joke that when he was Vice President, that they hoped Dick Cheney would die. That was protected speech.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like BryanS's post
15-06-2013, 03:21 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 02:43 PM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  
(15-06-2013 02:26 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Hey Pot, Kettle's calling. He's on line 2.

It's painfully transparent that you are the one dodging, not me.

This is precisely the topic of discussion. I know you're not going to answer my question--I expected you wouldn't, thus making my point. This kind of discussion about Liu's statement of principles is precisely the kind of debate and discussion the Communist party in China does not want to have. They feel threatened by this kind of discussion, because they know that if people discuss these ideas, they might agree that these principles should be incorporated into their government.

Look, we both want this discussion to be meaningful, right?

You are not going to say, regardless of the truth, that every single principle in you extracted from Liu's Charter 08 totally doesn't exist in China, are you ?

So after all we will have to talk about the difference between the difference between reality and Charter 08, why and how to achieve it, won't we ?

What's the point of asking which principle I don't agree ? To let me pick an obvious wrong choice to win our little debate ? No, I think you are better for it.

Liu's missing the point I suggested is to avoid doing some really good to the Chinese people. And that is called cheap. And that is why this Mr. Liu is in jail and I am not going to miss him a bit.


But would you truthfully say every single principle is followed in China today? If any are not, do you think they should be?

You are still obfuscating some. It's a bit of a straw man you have built suggesting that I claimed every single principle was violated in every way. I don't know enough about China to be able to make such a statement. But locking up someone for writing down these principles has me wonder why it was necessary to do that. What was so threatening about these principles. Someone in the Communist party fears this document for some reason. It is only reasonable to conclude that the Communist Party of China disagrees with at least some of these principles.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
15-06-2013, 03:30 PM
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 03:16 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Heck, we even had left wingers joke that when he was Vice President, that they hoped Dick Cheney would die.

I personally didn't hope he would die, I only wanted him to get shot but then, I'm not very far left wing. Dodgy Pointlessly... I still wouldn't mind him getting shot.

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kim's post
15-06-2013, 03:50 PM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2013 11:45 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 03:21 PM)BryanS Wrote:  But would you truthfully say every single principle is followed in China today? If any are not, do you think they should be?

You are still obfuscating some. It's a bit of a straw man you have built suggesting that I claimed every single principle was violated in every way. I don't know enough about China to be able to make such a statement. But locking up someone for writing down these principles has me wonder why it was necessary to do that. What was so threatening about these principles. Someone in the Communist party fears this document for some reason. It is only reasonable to conclude that the Communist Party of China disagrees with at least some of these principles.

You can continue on the "fear that / threatening" theory all you want, but it isn't helping. Let be practical, is the "they fear that" good ? If not, how to change that ? How to practically implement this change ?

It is relatively easier to continue the "fear that / threatening" argument and feel good about it. And it's relatively safe just talking about that. Because when people get into the "action time", there are risks of being the target of the law both in China and in US.

"But would you truthfully say every single principle is followed in China today? If any are not, do you think they should be?"

No, not every principle. And I don't think every principle should be followed.

OK, here, weigh these two: "what's the idea, what's the distance, what are the approaches", "what's his stance, what's his explanation, what's my counterattack". We are not simply seeking good feelings in debates, are we ?

==============================

I just realized that I was talking about "Liu's plans and ideas are impractical. It is unethical for him to call on others to sacrifice for this lame stuff. He did nothing good to the people except making himself a celebrity and tons of money. He could have done something ACTUALLY good by suing the government for illegal detention, and he had chosen not to do it. Shameful and despicable." The key is all about specific and practical plans.

You and others were talking about "Liu has every right to ask for better political structure. He can write, share and discuss all the Charters he want, as long as he doesn't talk about specific plans of overthrowing the government" The key is to avoid specific plans, whether practical or not is irrelevant.

There is no wonder we were in the opposite direction. It amazes me that we are still talking to each other. OK, I think I am out of the maze now.

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-06-2013, 07:57 PM
RE: Welcome to China.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
15-06-2013, 11:34 PM (This post was last modified: 15-06-2013 11:49 PM by HU.Junyuan.)
RE: Welcome to China.
(15-06-2013 07:57 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  The pot calling the kettle black.

I possibly have an idea about who the pot is, not much to my agreement though. But who is the kettle ?

[Image: em89.gif]

(15-06-2013 07:57 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  I have no idea what you are trying to say.

I'm constantly amused how you don't address the posts and attempt deflection with a personal attack. Hu funny.

By the way, "a personal attack" on you ? I had no idea and with no intention to do that. I was just learning from the confrontational way of saying things commonly done by you guys.

And I was attempting to mimic your words (hello teacher) and you seemed to have missed (or on purpose ?) the obvious.

It is nice that you find yourself amusing.

[Image: em114.gif]

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: