. . . and the Nobel isn’t even awarded by the Norwegian government. However, as much as this story stinks, and as much as people will have suffered from economic loss from its effects, it just doesn’t hit me with quite the force that the mass-gloating that happened on many websites (including Weibo) after Anders Breivik’s terrorist attack that killed 77 innocent people did.

October 7, 2011 @ 3:31 am | Comment

Looks like the CCP can hold a grudge as well as Steve Jobs could. Too bad they don’t have the capacity for innovation that Jobs had. And I can’t think of an appropriate parallel for their childish petulence. If they ever have designs of being truly considered as a world power (rather than merely as a desirable market), they need to learn to grow up.

October 7, 2011 @ 3:37 am | Comment

it just doesn’t hit me with quite the force that the mass-gloating that happened on many websites (including Weibo) after Anders Breivik’s terrorist attack that killed 77 innocent people did.

If I believed in God, these are the types of people I’d like to see in Hell. That includes people of every nationality, including — especially — the vile anti-Muslim hate sites here in the US, some of whom applauded the killings and/or said these kids had it coming because they were the next generation of Norway’s elitist leftists.

October 7, 2011 @ 3:39 am | Comment

@Richard – thanks for the link to the chinageeks article, just added it to my Google Reader.

October 7, 2011 @ 6:07 am | Comment

Unfortunately, due to the country’s economic heft, the world always has to walk around China on eggshells lest the CCP have its feelings hurt.

I think I have to stick up for Beijing in this case. Only some of the undignified egg-shelling should be blamed on Beijing. After all, they aren’t egg-shelling, are they?

October 7, 2011 @ 10:57 am | Comment

what a sad waste

October 7, 2011 @ 11:35 am | Comment

People who live near the warehouses might think they’re just chou doufu factories…
A far scarier manifestation of this type of behavior is the current rumors circultating on Twitter that Chen Guangcheng may be dead, according to activists who managed to make it to his village before being stopped and detained.

October 7, 2011 @ 1:47 pm | Comment

what a sad waste

Just a small footnote in these epochal tidings, krizcpec. What’s a heap of rotten salmon, in the wake of the great rise of the motherland?

October 7, 2011 @ 5:59 pm | Comment

These situations invite a kind of feedback that is potentially constructive. What if people wrote polite letters to PRC ambassadors and consuls and Confucius Institutes in their own countries, referring to this incident and saying how exciting it is to come to know and respect the different tastes (chou doufu, etc) of a 5000-year-old culture. As a token of goodwill, the writer encloses a dead fish.

Another possibility: in the Charlie Custer article which Richard linked, it is described how Chen Guangcheng’s six-year-old daughter is being kept out of school. What if an NGO advertised a part-time position for a tutor to serve a six-year-old under house arrest. The local education authorities should be approached, in a very public way, with offers to help fill this particular gap in their services. If the response is that it is “not convenient” for strangers to visit the home, then the NGO could offer to provide the service online and to pay for the installation of high-speed internet access in the Chen home. The response, or lack thereof, should be made public.

Some years ago it came to light that Zhao Zhangqing had been punished with 40 days’ solitary confinement for refusing to sing “Socialism is Good” during a flag-raising ceremony at the Shaanxi prison where he was incarcerated. I suggested to a friend at a rights-oriented NGO that they send an open letter to the superintendent of the prison:

“We understand the important role of cultural activities in your prison and sympathize with the frustration you must feel when performances fall short, as happens when a prisoner such as Mr. Zhao fails to do his part.

  “Our staff would like to pitch in when Mr. Zhao is unable to sing.  Please notify us when the anthem is scheduled: we will all sing it and if you would like, we will place a phone call to Shaanxi so that our chorus can be piped into the prison.
 
“All we ask in exchange is for you to stop punishing Mr. Zhao and allow him time to recover from the beatings he has experienced while in your custody, because some restoration of health might improve his ability to participate in the musical activities for which Weinan prison has become internationally renowned.”

While this approach is no more likely than any other to change the regime’s behavior, it would be more fun than patiently rebutting the posts of the wumao party, and it would have the advantage of appealing to the humor of Chinese citizens rather than provoking their defensiveness as denunciations tend to do. Recall the early efforts of Michael Moore when he was going after General Motors, and how his blend of humor and stubbornness turned the management’s refusal to talk to him into the most vivid and memorable public communication GM ever made.

October 7, 2011 @ 9:09 pm | Comment

Makes me wonder how China has a reputation for statecraft. Seems to me that the government has been making fail after fail after fail. The world seems to have caught up with them and they’re exposes as the non-entities they are.

October 7, 2011 @ 9:39 pm | Comment

Let’s look at the problems of Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo (imprisonment) and the arrest (house) of his wife Liu Xia. Everyone is on the ass of the CCP for intolerable, insufferable, suppression of human rights. I agree, for the most part.

“As far as I know, the way she is treated is unprecedented in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize,” Norwegian Nobel Committee secretary Geir Lundestad told the Associated Press earlier this week. “Her situation is extremely regrettable.” Neither Liu Xiaobo nor Liu Xia were allowed to attend the Peace Prize ceremony last December in Oslo. TIME http://globalspin.blogs.time.com/2011/10/06/for-chinese-nobel-laureates-wife-peace-prize-means-silence/

The Norwegian Nobel Committee

A Committee of Five

Since the first Nobel Prizes were awarded in 1901, the Peace Prize has, in accordance with Alfred Nobel’s will, been awarded by a committee of five, appointed by the Storting (the Norwegian Parliamant), but without the committee being formally responsible to the Storting. According to rules laid down by the Storting, election to the committee was to be for a six-year term, and members could be re-elected. The committee’s composition should reflect the relative strengths of the political parties in the Storting, but the committee has elected its own chairman and deputy chairman. It was never required by the rules and on some occasions the matter has been debated, but so far all committee members have been Norwegian nationals. In the nomination and selection process, the committee has the assistance of a secretary since the establishment of the Norwegian Nobel Institute in 1904, this person also being the institute’s director, as well as of a number of permanent and ad hoc consultants. The Norwegian Committee. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/articles/committee/Who are these five people? My point, which I wish to make, is that I believe the Nobel Committee itself to be, perhaps indirectly (responsible), if not completely, to blame for the crackdown on dissidents in China.

Everyone in the world (including myself), knew the reaction of the CCP. It would be swift, harsh and the family and friends also would not escape punishment too, perhaps indirectly, but punished nonetheless.

Did this august body even consider the repercussions and consequences of their actions or did having their head up their arse in some way prohibit their ability to render a judgement that would not have potential life and death consequences to the recipient and their families.

The Nobel Peace Committee shares some of the blame!

October 8, 2011 @ 11:39 am | Comment

Ironic…China lets perfectly clean and safe salmon rot away to waste as they continue to export poisoned substandard goods worldwide and allow domestic consumers to have to deal with food scandals at home on an almost daily basis…

October 8, 2011 @ 12:32 pm | Comment

William: I think your concern for Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia goes too far. From all I have heard, they didn’t object to the prize – they knew the consequences, and their preparedness to take the blows that would inevitably come from the CCP are admirable.

It is morally confused to suggest that the committee “shares some of the blame”. That could be true if they had put the spotlight onto naive people who themselves were unaware of the “consequences” – at least it would be worth a discussion.

October 8, 2011 @ 3:01 pm | Comment

To William,
can’t agree with that. It would be somewhat akin to blaming the victim of rape on the basis that she was apparently dressed provocatively. The Nobel committee didn’t bring this on Liu and his wife. The CCP did.

We can look at it another way. If the Nobel committee had to consider potential political repercussions, then the prize is no longer awarded based on merit, but instead becomes based on the merit of those fortunate enough to not live under oppressive regimes. And the only potential Chinese candidates would be those who kiss the ass of the CCP. That’s not the Nobel’s job. THat’s likely what the Zhou Enlai prize is for.

October 8, 2011 @ 3:54 pm | Comment

Yes, Cheung, I started wondering if it was wrong to give the prize to Carl von Ossietzky, too. Or to Desmond Tutu. I mean, von Ossietzky could have been murdered, rather than released, and Tutu could have been put under house arrest.

I don’t think the prize ever went to a laureate who was unaware of the possible “consequences”.

October 8, 2011 @ 4:32 pm | Comment

To JR,
I guess the South Africans had apartheid, but they were no CCP.

October 8, 2011 @ 5:17 pm | Comment

And China wonders why the world sees it as a prickly, pouting child.

Bullshit. Polls around the world show most people have a positive impression of China – this is especially the case for Africans.

A few white Europeans and Americans do not represent ‘world’ opinion.

October 8, 2011 @ 6:41 pm | Comment

I guess the South Africans had apartheid, but they were no CCP.

The CCP liberated China. Whereas racist white South Africans do not even belong in Africa.

At least Mugabe is doing a few things right.

October 8, 2011 @ 6:43 pm | Comment

Cheung,

my point is that neither von Ossietzky nor Tutu objected to the prize. If the CCP should decide to take even more distant relatives of Liu Xiaobo hostage, that’s nothing the Nobel Committee can be blamed for. Neither fully, nor with “a share of the blame”.

October 8, 2011 @ 6:50 pm | Comment

@William – The whole idea that giving the award was counter-productive when 1) Liu Xiaobo was already in prison when the award was granted and, 2) he is far from the only person to have extra-judicial punishment of loved ones used as a form of torture against him by the CCP, is totally ludicrous and morally bankrupt to boot.

October 8, 2011 @ 8:27 pm | Comment

Mark, the world may have a favorable opinion about China. But when it does things like the Confucius Prize the world snickers.

You aren’t Mongol Warrior, by any chance, are you?

October 9, 2011 @ 2:47 am | Comment

@FOARP
Neither did receiving the award set him free nor did it lessen his jail time. As stated, it lengthened his prison time and further endangered his wife, relatives and friends.
“Liu Xiaobo (traditional Chinese: 劉曉波; simplified Chinese: 刘晓波; pinyin: Liú Xiǎobō pronunciation: [ljǒʊ ɕjɑ̀ʊpɔ́]; born 28 December 1955) is a Chinese literary critic, writer, professor, and human rights activist who called for political reforms and the end of communist one-party rule in the People’s Republic of China (PRC).[1] He is currently incarcerated as a political prisoner in the PRC.

Liu has served from 2003 to 2007 as President of the Independent Chinese PEN Center, an organization funded by the National Endowment for Democracy,[2] an organization almost entirely funded by the US Congress. He was also the President of NED-funded MinZhuZhongGuo (Democratic China) magazine since the mid-1990s. On 8 December 2008, Liu was detained in response to his participation with the Charter 08 manifesto. He was formally arrested on 23 June 2009, on suspicion of “inciting subversion of state power.”[3][4] He was tried on the same charges on 23 December 2009,[5] and sentenced to eleven years’ imprisonment and two years’ deprivation of political rights on 25 December 2009.”[6] Wikipedia

AND, you actually believe the bestowal of the Nobel Peace Prize may have in some way helped him and the N.P.P Committee did in no way harm the man and his family by giving him the award?

To me, this is a no-brainer. I remember sitting in front of a tv set in 89 watching the Tiananmen demonstrations. I KNEW students and by-standers were going to die. Why didn’t they? Recipiency of a Nobel Prize is no honor.

@jusrrecently

“William: I think your concern for Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia goes too far. From all I have heard, they didn’t object to the prize – they knew the consequences, and their preparedness to take the blows that would inevitably come from the CCP are admirable.”

This is true of all dissidents/activists. They know the rules. If you go to far… Therefore, one might say when breaking the law, written or unwritten, and they are caught, whatever punishment administered by the authorities was brought down upon their head by their own hands. And, no tears should be shed for them.

@By S.K. Cheung
I’m a little long in the tooth, and during my lifetime, up to and including the present, I have heard many conversations where a woman has been vilified for wearing provocative clothing. She deserved the rape because she revealed the flesh. Can you or I say with certainty that this is not the case?

Your second paragraph is meritorious. I agree. A little bit. If you are talking about countries other than China!

Who actually WANTS to win a Nobel for any reason other than the money. Mr Nobel was no friend to mankind. If I were to speculate, I’d say he had feelings of guilt, thereby setting up his prizes, because his companies killed who knows how many humans. “Le marchand de la mort est mort” read his obit. Alfred Nobel was no friend to mankind.

Alfred Bernhard Nobel (21 October 1833 – 10 December 1896) was a Swedish chemist, engineer, innovator, and armaments manufacturer. He is the inventor of dynamite. Nobel also owned Bofors, which he had redirected from its previous role as primarily an iron and steel producer to a major manufacturer of cannon and other armaments. Nobel held 355 different patents, dynamite being the most famous. In his last will, he used his enormous fortune to institute the Nobel Prizes. The synthetic element nobelium was named after him. His name also survives in modern-day companies such as Dynamit Nobel and Akzo Nobel, which are descendents of the companies Nobel himself established.

“Dr. Alfred Nobel, who became rich by finding ways to kill more people faster than ever before, died yesterday.” “Le marchand de la mort est mort”

October 9, 2011 @ 3:17 am | Comment

William: Liu is not responsible for Alfred Nobel’s business. Mother Teresa wasn’t either, and I have never seen a discussion that she should decline the prize because of its original sponsor. The Nobel committee, as I said before, isn’t responsible for the PRC’s lack of accountability – “inciting subversion of state power” without further details is a one-size-fits-all phrase. Funding by U.S. sources was neither cited as a crime, nor even as a regulatory offense. You have added at least two more factors to your funky potpourri, but that hasn’t made it any less confused.

Therefore, one might say when breaking the law, written or unwritten, and they are caught, whatever punishment administered by the authorities was brought down upon their head by their own hands.
You are not only blending the committee’s and the CCP’s responsibilities, but the responsibilities of any accountable government and judicial system, too. That may be pretty convenient, if you want to deflect the criticism the CCP is facing. But it’s indeed only useful to those who do not wish to be held accountable to accurately defined standards.

If I follow your logic, “no tears should be shed” for anyone who, in whatever kind of situation, aware of the “consequences”, followed his or her conscience all the same, in history, or in our times. After all, they “went too far”.

October 9, 2011 @ 4:21 am | Comment

@justrecently

I have no love for the CCP. Nor do I respect the Nobel Committee.

Yes (I’m talking about China).

October 9, 2011 @ 4:49 am | Comment

Yes (I’m talking about China).
Don’t know what you mean, William. Is it that tears should be shed for anyone, unless he or she is Chinese? That wouldn’t make sense.

October 9, 2011 @ 5:06 am | Comment

O.K., you win.

October 9, 2011 @ 6:21 am | Comment

To “Mark”,
“the CCP liberated China”
—oh really? LOL. How did they do that, pray tell?

To William:
“As stated, it lengthened his prison time and further endangered his wife, relatives and friends.”
—actually, it’s the CCP who saddled him with prison and is holding his wife hostage. The CCP acted in response to the Nobel, but let’s be crystal clear about who is at fault here. The Nobel awarded a prize to a person they thought was deserving of it. And the CCP went ape-shit, which they are genetically programmed to do. Could the Nobel committee anticipate that awarding Liu might bring him some problems? Probably. So they shouldn’t award the prize to someone who they thought deserved it, because the CCP happens to be a bunch of asses? I don’t think you’re laying the blame where it belongs. The NPP is not the proximate cause for Liu’s current predicament. The CCP is.

“whatever punishment administered by the authorities was brought down upon their head by their own hands. And, no tears should be shed for them.”
—they may know what’s coming to them. They may even welcome it. In that sense, since it is their chosen path, a man’s gotta live with his choices. However, that reasoning only goes as far as the authorities’ actions being just (ie if you do the crime, you do the time). In this case, Liu didn’t commit a crime (we all know about the veracity of the CCP “legal” system when it comes to political issues). When the punishment is unjust, even if it is anticipated, there is no reason for bystanders to accept it.

“where a woman has been vilified for wearing provocative clothing”
—I don’t know how old you are, but no woman “deserves” rape. That is classic “blame the victim” thinking that really should have gone the way of the dinosaur.

Why would you only agree if the example referred to a country other than China? I don’t see the need for any distinction.

“Who actually wants to win a Nobel” is an irrelevant question in a discussion of how the CCP mistreats one of its Laureates. The reasons why Nobel bequeathed his fortune as an endowment for the Prize are well-documented. But that is also very irrelevant to the discussion.

October 9, 2011 @ 3:01 pm | Comment

This is an old argument, but if you want to see an example of what would have happened had Liu Xiaobo not been involved with foreign organisations, look at Guo Quan. Guo is in prison for the same crime as Liu, with the same sentence, the same treatment, but he was never involved with foreign organisations, never received a prize, and eschewed all foreign contact.

Really, I can’t see any clear evidence that the Nobel has harmed Liu.

October 9, 2011 @ 4:11 pm | Comment

@ S.K.

You misunderstood. I did not say a woman deserved to be raped. To clarify, no woman deserves to be raped. What I did say is that neither you nor I could say with certainty that a woman who wears revealing clothing could rule out a rape due to revealing clothing and coquettish behavior.

I used China as the example because she wags the tongues of the world – not North Korea, Myanmar or any other country with a two-bit dictator. And, only in China would an award raise such a stink.

“The reasons why Nobel bequeathed his fortune as an endowment for the Prize are well-documented. But that is also very irrelevant to the discussion.”

Hardly, why do you think he was locked up? Did you read Liu’s bio? It was written by Wikipedia, therefore, authenticity cannot be guaranteed….)
Hell, if I were a citizen of China, I’d have him arrested myself. Regardless, I still believe that the Nobel, while Liu himself may consider it an honor, harms his chances for early release and unnecessarily inflicts additional harm on his family by the CCP.

Few have ever taken the time to read about Alfred Nobel or no one would accept his blood stained awards appointed by the Nobel Prize Committee.

@FOARP While I respect Guo Quan: writing open letters to Hu JinTao demanding multi-party elections, to me, is just plain suicide. What did he expect? His sentence was ten (10) years not eleven (11) years as was Lui’s and I can find nothing on the treatment of his wife and family. However, you may be right.

October 9, 2011 @ 11:00 pm | Comment

To William,
if a woman is raped, it may be natural to look back to the events leading up to it to see if she could have been done something differently to have prevented it. Similarly, Liu may look back on events and wonder what he could have done to spare himself of his ridiculous incarceration. That may be human nature. But that also completely misses the point that it is the rapist who perpetrated rape; not the woman. Likewise, it is the CCP who perpetrated Liu’s incarceration; not Liu. If we are to apportion blame, we should reserve it for the perpetrator, and not the victim.

China is more influential than NK or Myanmar. But that is still irrelevant to who the Nobel committee may find to be deserving of their award. As I said, they award based on merit (as seen through their eyes), and not based on address. The Nobel committee is not responsible for the CCP being a petulant child.

“why do you think he was locked up? Did you read Liu’s bio?”
—It’s predictable as to why he was locked up. But did you see the CCP’s “legal” justification for locking him up? And while some people reach auto-erotic states reading about his NED links, that wasn’t the reason for his conviction. He was basically convicted for having the temerity to write Charter 08. That notwithstanding, I fail to see any connection whatsoever to how Nobel amassed his personal fortune.

“if I were a citizen of China, I’d have him arrested myself”
—on what grounds?

“I still believe that the Nobel, while Liu himself may consider it an honor, harms his chances for early release and unnecessarily inflicts additional harm on his family by the CCP.”
—that may be true. And the blame for that lies with the CCP.

“Few have ever taken the time to read about Alfred Nobel…”
—I hardly think Nobel’s story is news to anybody. I’d consider it fairly common knowledge. And if you’re not a fan of Nobel, then maybe you’re not a big fan of Einstein either, since his work has also gone towards some nefarious uses.

October 10, 2011 @ 2:26 am | Comment

@S.K.

“if I were a citizen of China, I’d have him arrested myself”

‘—on what grounds?’

That he might be dangerously close to putting myself and MY family in danger.

“But that also completely misses the point that it is the rapist who perpetrated rape; not the woman. Likewise, it is the CCP who perpetrated Liu’s incarceration; not Liu. If we are to apportion blame, we should reserve it for the perpetrator, and not the victim.”

I agree. Mostly. However, to persons living in China, Chinese citizens, if interviewed and showed the activities of Liu, I suggest to you that they would say he will be arrested. Many would call the police. Yes, the CCP is the authority and arresting party. However, Liu is not blameless. He knew the rules (written and unwritten) and took his chances. Martyr’s are prepared to die for their cause – seldom do they exhibit concern for their families.

Liu is where he knew he would be and wanted to be.

I, in the opening paragraph of my initial post, did place the blame on the CCP, for most, if not all of Liu’s problems. But, I will stick to my guns – the N.P.P.C. and the award of thr PEACE PRIZE played a role in the harshness of his punishment and will again when pleas, in the future, for his release. Let’s not forget that even before Lui’s sentence and incarceration there was an abundance of speculation (and leaked info) that Liu would be presented the Peace Prize.

Perhaps, these pronouncements only hastened a response from the CCP.

October 10, 2011 @ 5:05 am | Comment

Just no pleasing people…
http://www.globaltimes.cn/NEWS/tabid/99/ID/678431/Nobel-Prize-fever-burning-less-brightly-in-China.aspx
“But the acceptance of that dominance is declining subtly among the Chinese public, partly due to the feeling that China is being denied and ignored by the Prize. ”

So you give the Prize and they arrest the recipient, put his wife under house arrest and deny his 6 year old daughter rights to education etc, then they complain they don’t get the Prize enough because, subtly, it’s a Western plot.

October 10, 2011 @ 5:31 am | Comment

To William:
“That he might be dangerously close to putting myself and MY family in danger.”
—how does his Charter 08 achieve what you suggested here? Are you saying that the concepts espoused in the Charter are a threat to Chinese people? If so, how so? Alternatively, are you saying that you are a fellow Chinese dissident living in China, and his actions brought heat not only upon himself but also onto you as well (or perhaps had the potential for so doing)? But if it’s the latter, then we’re back to Mao and the 100 flowers movement where people rat out their neighbours to save themselves.

“I suggest to you that they would say he will be arrested.”
—OK, they clearly know how the CCP rolls. Yes, it might be predictable that he would be arrested. But that doesn’t make his arrest justified. The fact that the CCP is predictable does not make their actions right. In fact, all it does is make their actions predictably unjust.

“However, Liu is not blameless.”
—…if one were to engage in blaming the victim. Like I said earlier, you could similarly say a woman may not have been raped if she had done something differently or dressed differently. And you’d still be blaming the victim, rather than placing the blame where it belongs – on the perpetrator (be it the rapist, or the CCP).

“He knew the rules (written and unwritten) and took his chances.”
—agreed. I’m not suggesting that Liu should be shocked to find himself in his current predicament. But again, a predictable predicament does not make it a just predicament. The CCP is predictable and unjust. And rather good at it, sadly.

“Martyr’s are prepared to die for their cause – seldom do they exhibit concern for their families.”
—and again, that is hardly justification for their treatment of Liu Xia. Yes, a “martyr’s” actions could potentially endanger his/her family. But it is still up to the unjust regime (in this case the CCP) to fulfill that potential. The CCP, being the predictably unjust folks that they are, are only too happy to answer the call. Aren’t they just wonderful?

“the N.P.P.C. and the award of thr PEACE PRIZE played a role in the harshness of his punishment and will again when pleas, in the future, for his release.”
—certainly possible. Also impossible to prove one way or another, short of Hu Jintao suddenly feeling a life-changing cathartic moment coming on. What I am saying is that, if the CCP took Liu’s winning a Nobel as further impetus for screwing him over, it merely further reaffirms what a bunch of petulant, whiny, and predictably unjust jack-asses they are.

October 10, 2011 @ 6:12 am | Comment

@Mr.Goldthorpe

Interesting. So, too, is the conspicuous absence of the phrase “Nobel PEACE Prize” anywhere within the article. This is a signal, to me at least, that this particular prize (Peace) is persona non grata.

What is wanted are the prizes in scientific fields.

@S.K.

“What we’ve got here is failure to communicate.” spoken by The Captain, the imperious prison warden played by Strother Martin in the movie “Cool Hand Luke” starring Paul Newman.
Wiki & I.

I’ve not disagreed with either yourself or any other person in this exchange about the role of the CCP. Inherently evil, they. To be fair, however, I think that you, I, we, they would be remiss if we did not give the CCP plaudits where deserved.

October 10, 2011 @ 7:53 am | Comment

Mr Box – call me Mike 🙂 I think science is the route to a harmonious society in the current thinking. Listening to the BBC today in the car – religious program about religion in China. The CCP is making sure that the spiritual side of the Chinese people is tempered and influenced by their doctrine…of which science is an important part. You can listen to it here http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00kj584

October 10, 2011 @ 8:19 am | Comment

To William,
“would be remiss if we did not give the CCP plaudits where deserved.”
—agreed. She should be applauded or criticized as the situation requires. In particular, in the last 30 years, the CCP has done some good in some areas. But our current topic of discussion is not one of those areas that deserves plaudits.

October 10, 2011 @ 1:10 pm | Comment

@Mike. I heard the same interview (twice) including the witless comments by that Fudan academic (an oxymorom) on religions in the PRC. Look, I give China pretty high marks for an absence of religious sectarianism. In fact, China looks pretty darn good in contrast to Egypt, the Middle East and that pile of failed state excrement Pakistan.
And no, I don’t want to hear about Tibet and Zinjiang since I,m talking generally about a billion plus not killing each other over matters of belief.And this also links to issues of sexual orientation, where gays and homosexuals are sort of accepted rather than stoned to death.

October 10, 2011 @ 6:55 pm | Comment

@KT
Atheist myself so am ambivalent wrt religions and their importance. I was just struck at the use of “scientific” to justify what they saw as improving society. This is pretty close to the Right Wing European social science of the 20s and 30s (in Sweden’s case I believe that carried on until the 70s) – it wasn’t science then, it isn’t now.
Looking at how Central Asia is faring (generally) and Pakistan, I can’t see Xinjiang being a great haven of peace and tranquility should Beijing lose it. Given how the Hui are responding to what are perceived to be proper forms of Islam from that most backward of theocratic countries I dare say there’s going to be problems. Of course, given the rise (apparently) of Christianity, I dare say people will be loking back to the CCP years with a certain fondness….

October 11, 2011 @ 4:43 am | Comment

@Mike I’ve got a laptop with a very bad sound card and I could barely hear the presentation you linked to.. But thanks. I’ll tuck away the URL and listen later on another computer.

In China, to me, the number of religions and the government acceptance (tolerance)is remarkable. Numbers are,however, the key to the CCP’s willingness to permit individuals to practice their faith. I’m certain you know more about the subject than I. But, I’d like to throw in a couple of comments about western religion and its influence on China.

It’s been too long since I did any serious reading on the subject. Recollection tells me that religion began about 1100 due to dynastic curiosity and survived until present day. Survivors are:.

I got these from Wiki

Buddhism
Taoism
Christianity
Islam
Confucianism
Judaism
Hinduism
Catholicism
Sikhism

From Matteo Ricci to a Baptist minister named I. J. Roberts who taught scripture to Hong Xiuquan in the 1800’s (HX thought he was the younger brother of Jesus Christ) and fomented a revolution based on the teachings of a Christian missionary. Of course he changed some portions of the Bible to fit his agenda. Numbers of killed about 20 to 30 million. TAIPING REVOLUTION.

I’ve read a few articles that conclude that China (will save the Christian religion) is the next great movement to Christianity and will drive out the Muslims.

It is interesting that in some instances religion brought (thru Rulers) peace, law, rules, education, and in other cases, civil disorder and revolution.

Religion in China – a great subject to discuss.

I think I’m off topic but maybe the boss will let it stand.

October 11, 2011 @ 5:09 am | Comment

@Richard

I was wondering if you would accuse the US and Europe as prickly, pouting child for enforcing sanctions on Libya or Syria to manipulate through individuaks that they care about human rights while previously sending prisoners to get tortured by Gaddhafi and Assad?

October 11, 2011 @ 7:08 am | Comment

@Jason
A quick perusal through the majority of the western press (this does not mean Fox/CNN) shows many in the west already think our dear leaders prickly and poutish…..
Of course, being democracies, what previous political parties had done is not the concern of those currently in power – the people had decided by ballot to change the regime because of their actions.

October 11, 2011 @ 8:08 am | Comment

Yes, Jason, I’m sure he would. Despite there being no detectable parallel between those two things at all.

October 11, 2011 @ 9:47 am | Comment

Dear Jason,

did Syria give Gaddhafi a Peace Prize which led to US sanctions against Syria? Or are there sanctions against Syria for somewhat less trivial reasons?

Did Libya give Assad a Peace Prize which led to US and Western sanctions against Libya, or did Libya do things that were slightly more deserving of sanctions than merely handing out an award?

You never learn. You’re always keen to compare, but you always forget about comparing things that are actually comparable. Looks like you were away for a while, but it seems you still have learned nothing.

October 11, 2011 @ 10:38 am | Comment

As most of us know Jason is a borderline troll, meaning at times he can make semi-rational arguments, but usually he is just another member of the “America is worse” school of trollery. How his mind shifts from Norwegian salmon and the Nobel peace prize to Libya and Gaddafi is beyond me, but is also totally typical.

October 11, 2011 @ 11:30 am | Comment

@SKC – Good comment, but Sesame Street said it much more simply:

“One of these things is not like the other . . .”

October 11, 2011 @ 1:25 pm | Comment

@Mike Goldthorpe: what previous political parties had done is not the concern of those currently in power

This would be a strong argument if Obama didn’t follow Bush policies of secret prisons and torture.

@the people had decided by ballot to change the regime because of their actions

Just look at the candidates of the Republican party. With the exception of two candidates, the three top-tier candidates Cain, Perry, Romney, etc doesn’t seem to change on Obama’s foreign policies.

===

It’s pretty clear that the parallel is “country A using sanctions or any form of trade ban on country B as a punishment of whatever reason that country A finds it volatile of what country B is doing.

@Richard As usual, ad hominem there and that but you still haven’t answered a simple question.

–another member of the “America is worse” school of trollery.

No I am a member of wanting criticisms of United States/Europe and China equally in terms of emphasizing. This applies to chinageeks-types and hiddenharmonies-types and the estalishment media.

October 12, 2011 @ 11:13 am | Comment

“Just look at the candidates of the Republican party. With the exception of two candidates, the three top-tier candidates Cain, Perry, Romney, etc doesn’t seem to change on Obama’s foreign policies.”
—but candidates aren’t obligated to suggest a change of course. They have their vision and/or platform, and that’s what voters decide on. But there is no requirement that their vision/platform MUST be different from the incumbent. That’s silly logic. Besides, if the electorate actually wants a vision/platform that is diametrically opposed to that of the incumbent, then that would be the perfect sweet spot for a candidate to fulfill, if an individual so desired.

““country A using sanctions or any form of trade ban on country B as a punishment of whatever reason that country A finds it volatile of what country B is doing.”
—that hardly qualifies as an English sentence. Besides, (and seriously, what is the problem with CCP apologists comprehending this point) Norway didn’t award the Nobel. The Nobel committee did.

“No I am a member of wanting criticisms of United States/Europe and China equally in terms of emphasizing.”
—again, hardly qualifies as an English sentence. But since this blog purports to be about China, your enthusiasms about the US and Europe are rather out of place here. I think your proclivities and intellectual capacity are much more suited for the HH crowd.

October 12, 2011 @ 11:33 am | Comment

Max, I am deleting this comment, and you know why. Please stop the personal attacks.

Richard

October 12, 2011 @ 7:51 pm | Comment

Another possibility: in the Charlie Custer article which Richard linked, it is described how Chen Guangcheng’s six-year-old daughter is being kept out of school. What if an NGO advertised a part-time position for a tutor to serve a six-year-old under house arrest. The local education authorities should be approached, in a very public way, with offers to help fill this particular gap in their services. If the response is that it is “not convenient” for strangers to visit the home, then the NGO could offer to provide the service online and to pay for the installation of high-speed internet access in the Chen home. The response, or lack thereof, should be made public.

Some years ago it came to light that Zhao Zhangqing had been punished with 40 days’ solitary confinement for refusing to sing “Socialism is Good” during a flag-raising ceremony at the Shaanxi prison where he was incarcerated. I suggested to a friend at a rights-oriented NGO that they send an open letter to the superintendent of the prison.

October 12, 2011 @ 11:38 pm | Comment

So when is Bradley Manning going to win a Nobel? You know, someone who actually deserves the prize?

October 14, 2011 @ 2:16 pm | Comment

Norway didn’t award the Nobel. The Nobel committee did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Nobel_Committee

“Its five members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament and roughly represent the political makeup of that body.”

Thorbjørn Jagland (chair, born 1950), former Member of Parliament and President of the Storting and former Prime Minister for the Labour Party, current Secretary General of the Council of Europe. Member and chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee since 2009.
Kaci Kullmann Five (deputy chair, born 1951), former member of Parliament and cabinet minister for the Conservative Party. Member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee since 2003, deputy chair since 2009.
Sissel Rønbeck (born 1950), deputy director, Norwegian Directorate for Cultural Heritage (Riksantikvaren), former member of parliament and cabinet minister for the Labour Party. Member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee since 1994.
Inger-Marie Ytterhorn (born 1941), former member of Parliament for the Progress Party. Member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee since 2000.
Ågot Valle (born 1945), former member of parliament for the Socialist Left Party. Member of the Norwegian Nobel Committee since 2009.

Oh special Cheungsie, will you ever stop pretending you’re intelligent?

China is fighting for its interests. Norway still has broad access to a large market. China arbitrarily nicking their profits is not going to bankrupt the poor, poor Norwegians.

Now, sanctions against Chinese exporters (or Vietnamese/Burmese/Iranian civilians, choose your era) will certainly harm, as your corporate overlords claim in their papers and magazines, millions of Chinese migrant laborers. Miiiillions!

And yet they are punished for the actions of a small number of (former) government officials.

Sound familiar?

Except when the West does it it’s okay, even if it kills millions of children. I weep for the poverty stricken nation of Norway, but I’m thinking Anders Breivik has hurt them far more than the Big Bad Evil Childish Insecure Angry (miss anything, Richard?) CCP has.

October 14, 2011 @ 2:22 pm | Comment

William Box, are you suggesting that all countries always do what China wants in order not to make waves? In that case this spoiled brat has won. Of course they knew China would react harsly. Sombody needs the gut to tell China they are way off. They did the same to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia (as well as Martin Luther King fighting abuses in the US). It is worth the lost revenue in salmon – go on!!

October 14, 2011 @ 10:05 pm | Comment

These stupid fenqing and their Bradley Manning logic fails. A Chinese Bradley Manning would be dead already and unheard of, with bloggers who mentioned his name disappeared for good measure. Why comment on shit you know nothing about?

October 15, 2011 @ 4:03 am | Comment

Go ahead and create a prize of your own, cookiemonster. The world is waiting.

October 15, 2011 @ 4:28 am | Comment

@By Watcher

When I understand what you have written, I’ll respond.

October 15, 2011 @ 5:24 am | Comment

To man’sbestfriend:
“So when is Bradley Manning going to win a Nobel? You know, someone who actually deserves the prize?”
—if the Nobel Peace Prize becomes the default prize for whistleblowers and document-leakers, then Manning may well receive consideration. However, merely leaking documents seems like a pretty low bar. At least Assange did some sorting and collating. Maybe he might get some consideration too…if the NPP was for people who sorted/collated/posted on the internet the product of whistleblowers and document-leakers. Ahhh, but someone who took those leaked documents or uncovered information, and actually did something worthwhile with them…that might merit some legitimate consideration. Any names you’d like to offer up? Such an individual might have to share it with Manning and Assange, but at this point, Manning winning it would be nothing more than the subject of one of your evocative dreams.

““Its five members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament and roughly represent the political makeup of that body.””
—you are quite slick with the wiki. I wonder, you being man’sbestfriend and all, what else you can “fetch” for me, eh? Slippers, perhaps…
Anyhow. They are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. But they are not answerable to the Norwegian Parliament. And their decisions are not Norwegian parliamentary/government decisions. Supreme Court judges are also appointed by the government. But their decisions are independent of political interference (well, unless you’re a Chinese Supreme Court judge, of course). So unless you have some basis to say that the Nobel committee makes decisions based on the will of the Norwegian parliament, you are again quite literally “barking” up the wrong tree.

You know, I’ve never even associated the facade of intelligence with you. Such as it were.

THe CCP no doubt tries to advance its interests. How it does so by acting like a petulant child is beyond me. But whatever floats your boat. Norway won’t go broke with some fish rotting in a warehouse. But China letting fish rot “arbitrarily”, as you say, doesn’t do much for their image either. And considering that “face” is everything for the CCP, one wonders what they hope to gain by acting like children.

October 15, 2011 @ 2:41 pm | Comment

A Chinese Bradley Manning would be dead already and unheard of

Source? Evidence?

Oh, nope. You special kids don’t need those.

October 20, 2011 @ 10:41 am | Comment