Unofficial Running Olympic Boycott thread

I reasonably expect the government of the People's Republic of China to not censor the history of the events of June 1989 in internal histories and to give an honest accounting of its actions and its body count. (1) (2)

I reasonably expect China to withdraw from Tibet and cease its unwarranted interference in the world Buddhist community.

I reasonably expect China to adopt more stringent manufacturing safety guidelines, and to admit that its business partners' legitimate concerns over product safety and quality control are not "outside interference in internal Chinese matters."

I reasonably expect China to cease its ongoing efforts to steal nuclear and arms technology from other countries, efforts which include government-sponsor Internet cracking teams endlessly attacking our government's networks.

I reasonably expect China to adopt strong environmental standards ASAP.

 

Sometimes the Olympics come to town right at the apex of a repressive country's hubris and self-importance, about a decade before everything crashes. 1936 and 1980 spring to mind as examples.

 

History isn’t fully censored. The people know it happened. However, they aren’t going to advertise it. You cannot reasonably expect the same government that was willing to kill its own students to change their mind on the situation completely in as short as 20-years.

At this current point in time, the information given to the people is that the best option was not taken but that they are not sure what the best option was.

Again, this isn’t reasonable. That is like saying you want Ireland to stop bothering with Northern Ireland or Britain to stop bothering with Northern Ireland. How long has that been going on? How about every country asking us to get the fuck out of Iraq?

The Chinese government and the Chinese citizens believe that Tibet is their property.

The rest, well, I’m not too sure about the world Buddhist community. I would like to read more on this.

This would actually be reasonable. This should have been their tactic from the beginning. They should have addressed it.

This is not reasonable. Why would you demand something from others that we are doing here? Why would they stop trying to steal nuclear information? They are a government that wants to be a big player on the world stage. It isn’t reasonable to believe that they wouldn’t perform the same espionage that every other country is doing.

At the expense of their economy they will not do this ASAP. They have taken steps (steps which have cost homes and lives for many). The damn along the Jang Xi (spelling is probably off on that) is one step. This damn will use the water’s current to generate energy, enough energy to eliminate 90% of its coal usage for the Shanghai region.


You cannot reasonably expect a dictatorship to just loosen the belt. The belt has been tight for so long that the mere fact that American goods are getting in there is change. The first time ever, the Chinese government did not censor a James Bond movie.

That is progress. It isn’t great progress, but it is progress. Further progress, further change, and further openness takes time. You cannot reasonably expect a nation that 25-years ago sat as in isolation.

 

Come on. The 1991 recession wasn't that bad.
Or were you just talking about the Summer Olympics? ;D

 

Pastor, let me say first off that I am tremendously disappointed in you. The statements you have made are directly controverted by the facts, some of which were posted as links for your further research.

History has been censored inside the People's Republic of China. The links I posted have direct proof of that.

They link to Reuters stories that were sent over the wire last June, in the wake of the 18th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. Somebody walked into the offices of Chengdu Evening News and paid for a small ad to run in the lower corner of page 14 of that publication's June 4 edition last year: "Paying tribute to the strong(-willed) mothers of June 4 victims."

Apparently, this person had tried to place the ad in two other area newspapers, but the ad clerks there checked with their superiors at which time the advertiser left quickly. At the office of Chengdu Evening News, the clerk took the ad after being told in was in memory of a mining disaster. According to the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, the clerk accepted the ad because she had never heard of the Tiananmen Square crackdown and so did not understand the significance of the date. Reuters' source on one of the stories said that the clerks at the other two papers also did not know the significance of the date. References to the Tiananmen Square massacre are banned in state-run media, the Internet and printed works.

A million people on the streets in the spring of 1989. Four thousand or more slaughtered by their own army. None of it remembered by the man or woman on the street in China. Search for it on Google's Chinese site from a computer inside China and you get this message in your browser: "According to the local laws, regulations and policies, part of the searching result is not shown."

Ang Lee's movie <i>Summer Palace</i> was banned in China last summer simply for referring to the massacre, as were the books <i>Collection Of June Fourth Poems</i> and <i>Zhao Ziyang's words during his house arrest</i>.

In 2006, a crew from PBS' Frontline showed some Peking University students a picture ... this one in particular:



One of the most famous images of the 20th Century: the solitary Chinese man standing in front of People's Army tanks to prevent them from rolling into Tiananmen Square. A picture that should need no introduction, especially in his own country and especially at a university where many students participated in the protests 18 years before. None of those current students could identify the photo; some thought it was artwork or a military parade.

False, by my previous statements. History in China is fully censored. An entire generation of young Chinese people do not know the crimes committed by their government; of course, the winners get to rewrite the history books to suit themselves.

The Chinese government may believe it so, but I know of no evidence supporting your thesis regarding the Chinese people. Tibet was always independent, up until the Chinese empire started mucking about in Tibetan affairs in 1751.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01EEDC1F3AF93BA25752C0A9669C8B63
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panchen_Lama#11th_Panchen_Lama

How about this? http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article2409865.ece

Oh, but that's OK. Aren't the Chinese our friends؟

You mean the Three Gorges Dam, of course. And it will produce lots of electricity, until the silt carried in the Yangtze River builds up to such a level that it slows the current in front of the generators' intakes. That sedimentation could also lead to the dam failing because the sluice gates are so clogged up that they can't function. Oh, and the Three Gorges Dam sits on a fault line; the weight of the dam and reservoir can lead to induced seismicity, as happened with the Katse Dam in Lesotho (which does not sit on a fault line) and Lake Kariba on the Zambia-Zimbabwe border (a notoriously seismic region), which is believed to have caused over 20 earthquakes of magnitude 5 or greater.

 

Interesting concept that BECAUSE the Olympics is such a corporate circle-jerk, that companies may end being the lever on human rights over there. If enough public attention is given to what China is doing, it may not be seen as a good thing to be linked with the Olympics. Now I realize that that ship has sailed and the contracts have been signed, but public opinion is a powerful thing, especially if it can affect stock prices.

 

My information comes mostly from firsthand accounts as well as my own reading and research. I’m aware of the Chinese government’s ability to gloss over history and change it more than just about anyone. I have friends that are teachers there…

I’m aware. I have actually done that…

I’m not disagreeing (I’ll come back to this in a bit)…

I’ll try this myself the next time I’m over. I probably won’t be in Beijing, but that shouldn’t matter.

From those I have talked to (which includes policemen over there) my statement holds. Quite frankly, many people are very embarrassed about what occurred.

Again, this just comes from conversations with individuals. It also comes from a paucity of knowledge regarding the original take-over.

Thank you for this. I was aware of their meddling in regards to forming laws and such. However, I still only really see this in relation to Tibet which goes towards the previous point.

I think you mistake what I believe to be ok and what the Chinese government believes to be ok.

I am not arguing because I believe that this is all well and good, what I’m arguing was what is to be reasonably expected from a dictatorship country that just 20-years ago shot their own students.

You got it! I didn’t say it was perfect. I merely pointed out that it was an attempt. Whether or not all of the problems listed come to pass (and they are all possible) is to be seen.


I tried to preface my first post on this with saying that I am not in disagreement. Hell, you have no idea how many times I have had such arguments and with how many people and on Chinese soil. The point that I am trying to make is that the government has taken steps to adjust and move forward.

They certainly have a serious problem with their history. However this cannot be curtailed forever. Eventually, people learn and they obtain the information. Things change. It also takes time for things to change.

 

Just be happy the nation hibernated (economically) for most of the 20th century.

The monster had to wake up sometime.

 

FACT!

I believe, however, that when the world starts peering in on the country during the Olympics, things will become very exposed. Either the country will become more isolationist as a result is a possibility. I have hope in those that go over, no matter how small that hope is.

 

The problem is that the Chinese have managed to become fully capitalist without being politically free -- and so much for our free-marketeers who argue that the former necessarily results in the latter -- in large part because the capitalists elsewhere in the world are perfectly happy with the situation and therefore, the Chinese have no motivation for changing.

 

This is true in terms of what has occurred. However, the change could still come by way of the free market.