‘If I disappear’: Chinese students make farewell messages amid crackdowns
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
It's interesting that people who were subject to this sort of treatment created the constitution limiting the US govt.
It's interesting that people who aren't subject to this sort of treatment are trying to change the constitution and give the govt more power.
It's interesting to me that democide is the number 1 cause of death in the 20th century and everyone ignores that fact.
Its also interesting to me that the internet allows people to communicate and learn how much all govts lie.
Change is coming as govts try to control the internet and the communication people have with each other.
> It's interesting that people who aren't subject to this sort of treatment are trying to change the constitution and give the govt more power.
You mean like, when the 13th amendment was passed to abolish slavery and involuntary servitude? Pesky "govt" now telling folks they can no longer own human beings as property, that kind of thing?
Not all government power is oppression. A huge ton of it is vital for basic human welfare. Simplistic assertions like "those who seek to change the consitution are trying to give the government more power and therefore obviously have not experienced real oppression" are not furthering the conversation productively.
Prior to this, various laws and judicial decisions (such as Dredd Scott) had made aiding fugitive slaves illegal, and had practically made slavery legal in all states regardless of the will of the people.
Surprisingly, slavery persisted even after the Civil War. Here is a powerful, true story of someone who was a slave around 1900:
https://www.amazon.com/Emancipation-Robert-Sadler-Twentieth-...
That's the point of constitutional amendments: to limit the power of the government.
The Bill of Rights was about limiting the power of the (federal) government, but subsequent Amendments have both increased and decreased the power of the government.
In the North the government had outlawed slavery prior the Civil War. in the South, the Amendment promulgated Lincoln's wartime decree freeing the slaves. The Amendment limited the power of the states to enforce slavery and enshrined the power of the federal government to ban slavery.
The 16th Amendment gave the government the power to levy an income tax. The 18th Amendment, i.e., Prohibition, gave the government the power to ban alcohol (until it was rescinded by the 21st Amendment).
If so, the main issue with slavery was that it was legal, not that it was rampant.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Clearly gives the government power to ban slavery. It does not enshrine any rights in citizens, and indeed notes that involuntary servitude may still be imposed as criminal sanction.
Its not banning the practice of slavery but the promise of legally enforcing them.
It's estimated to be the number one cause of non-natural deaths
Do you really think its possible to find "the truth" of numbers when it comes to things like democide?
>A poorly researched, obsessively anti-Soviet polemical general survey. [1]
Unsurprisingly, you would have read that exact quote in the reddit thread I linked. Guess that was too much to ask for.
[1] Jonathan Smele, Russian Revolution and Civil War Annotated Bibliography
Having said that, 60 million killed in USSR alone would seem highly suspicious. 60 million repressed sounds quite feasible. And as Stalin would acknowledge (death of one is a tragedy, death of millions is statistics), in a way it doesn't really matter -- communists killed as many, if not significantly more, people as Nazis, but because they usually did it to their own population, and weren't defeated by an invading army, they escaped anything resembling Nuremberg Tribunal, and to this day Nazi defenders keep quiet in decent society, but Soviet apologia is pretty rampant.
Regarding your last points: 60 million repressed is entirely dependent on how you define "repressed". Some people may argue that not having access to health care and education means being repressed. Just noting that it's not really a useful value, it's already difficult estimating number of deaths, estimating such a vague term as "repressed" people will be next to impossible. Regarding your claim that communists killed as many if not more people than Nazis, I really dislike this kind of comparisons. It is an extremely politicized topic, removes the human part of the statistics and historical context. Even then, I would still disagree with your claim, unless you count Mao's Great Leap Forward as part of it, which is really a comparison between apples and oranges. I personally believe state-pursued, systematic genocides should be differentiated from famines (such as the Holodomor and the famines related to the Great Leap Forward) which were more of a consequence of the regime's terrible management (plus already low harvest in the case of the Holodomor). If you want to take a look, the Wikipedia page for the excess mortality under Stalin is not too bad, especially the source they used (Wheatcroft's Victims of Stalinism and the Soviet Secret Police).
I don't see Nazi defenders keeping quiet, I think it's enough to think of the growing "Identity Politics" movement. Soviet apologia is rarely referring to the Stalinist period, especially considering Khrushchev's 56' "De-Stalinization" speech. And if you only consider the USSR of Khrushchev and beyond, while definitely worth criticizing, I'm not sure it's even comparable to the Nazi regime.
I mean specifically repressed through the state apparatus, not lacking Internet access. Of course there are different degrees of that repression here, from being executed on the spot, to dying of hunger and overwork, all the way down to being relocated 101+ kilometers from a big city.
I would very much count victims of Holodomor (as well as of less known famines in Central Asia etc.) and Great Leap -- it does not matter to the dying if the State actively wanted to kill them, or just did not care the least bit if they die or not. And there are studies from real historians that conditions in Soviet labor camps, during peace time, were worse than in Nazi extermination camps (I am not sure if there are English copies online, but certainly Russian ones are accessible).
Absolute numbers may not mean all that much (although as far as exterminating their own citizenry, communist Khmer Rouge have no equals) but it is still important to remember and never forget -- it's not a competition who is more evil, it's about making sure that evil does not get repeated.
USSR of Khrushchev and beyond -- it's also place where workers demonstrating for decent pay and food for their children were fired upon by the army, slight liberalization efforts in satellite countries were crushed with tanks, dissidents had their brains fried in psychiatric hospitals, etc. etc. Sure, it was much better than Reich in the 30s-40s, or USSR itself in the same period, but it is also an apples to oranges comparison. Had Reich been contained instead of defeated, chances are it would have evolved into something similar by then as well. But Soviet apologia usually does not make a distinction anyway.
Can you please provide a reputable source for this claim? I find this difficult to believe.
Terminus 端点星计划,是在 GitHub 开放平台搭建的一个站点,以去中心化的方式备份微信、微博等平台被删文章。
Terminus is a site set up on GitHub's open platform to back up posts deleted from WeChat, Weibo and other platforms by means of decentralization.
How removed from society can you be to view disappearing, humilating and torturing citizens as "a bit low"?
Have we forgotten the purpose of a government?
> Qiu Shike, a socialist writer and Xi supporter who is influential within some elite Communist Party circles, said carefully
If you saw the recent HBO series on Cheronybl, you can see the pains with which one person is trying to relay the seriousness of the situation without making himself a target, opposition figure, enemy of the state, etc. I also remember hearing that Sadam Hussein underestimated how easily Iraq could be toppled in case of invasion because his military generals were too scared to speak truth.
The first is that Asian culture (including Japan, Korea) is profoundly dogmatic and hierarchical. They have a completely different moral-alignment with being obedient.
The second is that over time, you can really achive the social transformation spouted by authoritarian governments. Russia was communist for 90 years. North korea approaching 70 years. After several generations what you have is the only thing that people know.
As a westerner, I find it truly amazing that these systems survive at all.
Anyone in North Korea who would speak up has long since escaped, been disappeared, or killed.
The liberty nutjobs really have a point about being intolerant to the minuscule interventions: by this model, its a way of domesticating people.
OTOH I don't believe this idea is right, because humanity has had slavery and oppression since time immemorial, and freedom as we know it is relatively new. It is a natural desire of human beings to fight against glaring injustices, and for the oppressed to fight back.
> As a westerner, I find it truly amazing that these systems survive at all.
It shouldn't be amazing, as a Westener, considering slavery was legally allowed and enforced in the West for longer than any alternate authoritarian regime in modern times. Just consider slavery in American from 1776-1865... I can't think of any authoritarian regime that lasted that long... North Korean regime (1948-present), Soviet regime (1917-1989), Chinese regime (1949-present), were/are close but still haven't yet achieved the length of authoritarianism exercised over some arbitrary portion of its populace.
It's very different to not protest or to comply out of fear than to be morally aligned to the subservience. To this day South Korea still uses physical violence to discipline kids. I've seen some very authoritative and strong personality types turn into sheep by the mere act of talking to an older person, which is the key hierarchy. There is the famous phrase in Japanese: "The nail that sticks out gets hammered". Or chinese people, as in this topic, have a completely different relationship to Tiananmen Square or the Muslim than what the west would have with Abu Ghraib.
Asia just does not have the Liberty moral alignment the west has, be it for historical, cultural or biological reasons. Maybe rebelliousity is distinctly western, since the middle east also shows some of those patterns.
> It shouldn't be amazing, as a Westener, considering slavery was legally allowed and enforced in the West for longer than any alternate authoritarian regime in modern times. Just consider slavery in American from 1776-1865... I can't think of any authoritarian regime that lasted that long... North Korean regime (1948-present), Soviet regime (1917-1989), Chinese regime (1949-present), were/are close but still haven't yet achieved the length of authoritarianism exercised over some arbitrary portion of its populace.
There are plenty of examples of slave-driven societies that were sent into extinction because of this practice (Sparta, Rome, The US South). Its true it took a while in the US, but it was constantly violated and affected a small part of an imported population. Had the general populace been able to be thrown into slavery, I can't imagine it lasting much.
I can imagine chatel/small slavery lasting a long time because its a millenarian practice. But total control of the state? Near absolute economic slavery of the entire population? I cant imagine anything working out at all, and nobody collaborating to make it work.
Even in the 90s, when this was a prominent issue in American minds, when the State Department would offer the occasional "stiff rebuke", politicians told us that trade would inevitably move China toward an open democratic society.
More generally I think recent history has disproven a core tenet of libertarianism: that personal and societal level freedom are inseparable from economic freedom and capitalism (in the liberal meaning of the term) and the prosperity it generates.
China proves that capitalism works just fine and even "benefits" (in a raw GDP sense) from an otherwise totalitarian state and that personal freedom and human dignity are optional.
Pushing back on China is one of the very few things I agree with the Trump administration about, and I think it was bound to happen anyway without them. The deal was that we would open generous free trade with China and they would liberalize and open up to us. They broke the deal in multiple ways, taking that economic growth and then closing their markets and re-embracing totalitarianism.
Political freedom that is. Personal freedom and human dignity are optional in "open societies" too with many countries having it worse than in China.
I have tons of motivation to do something about the largest totalitarian regime. Just tell me where to go and what to do.
I woulnd't assume that quite a few people don't feel this way. The issue isn't lack of motivation. It's the lack of any sort of leverage over a giant totalitarian foreign government.
I'm not taking a moral stand here. I don't think anybody not doing anything is a bad person. But let's not pretend ignorance and inability. We don't even try. Reading HN is much more comfortable, besides life has many challenges already.
If you offer me (1G$/50yr=) 20 million dollars a year to spend eight hours a day trying to find a solution to this, then sure, I'll take that job and do it to the best of my ability. I don't expect to succeed, but as long as the paychecks clear I'll keep working.
If you offer me a billion dollars contingent on finding a solution, I'm going to ignore you, just like I ignore the people offering a million dollars for a solution to P vs NP, or XX million dollars for correctly predicting which six balls they pull out of a basket.
I wouldn't spend 100% of my time on that singular social problem, but yes.
But that has nothing to do with reality on account of you having not given me any money, and me not having enough resources to quit my job and fund such initiatives against one of the largest economic powers in the world.
Going there and spreading that message seems like a bad idea.
What's more, you replied without read my comment (or misread?). I said I'm a Chinese in the first sentence. I would like to have conversations with people who are serious about the matter but even on HN where people are rational and logical in most other topics are not showing their best when it comes to topics about China.
Anyway here's one guy who learned chinese: https://www.youtube.com/user/jaredfaa (he's a bigger influencer on bilibili coz youtube is unfortunately blocked in China)
here's a guy went around the world and passed China without knowing Mandarin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjI1O11S8KY (one of his several vidoes)
Anyway, ignorance promotes fear. Understand the problem first before propose solutions.
I mean no disrespect to Mandarin itself.
Anyway here's a Chinese social media site with many people working in SFBA. I guess you can have more access to places like that if you know a bit Mandarin.
Not that I won't try again, but I know it's an ordeal for me which takes lots of time I already don't have right now. I've taken and failed two separate language courses, not due to a lack of trying.
Learning foreign languages seems quite hard for me due to the nature through which I learned to read. I taught myself to read between age 2-3 and kind of just coasted on that for a long time, since I had mostly subpar public education.
But failing at multiple foreign languages has taught me the need to step back and have a better understanding of language in general before tackling it again.
But Mandarin is so far left field from other popular languages. Learning the Greek and Cyrillic alphabet was hard enough. I have severe ADHD and memory problems. I have used Anki for a long time and spaced repetition alone takes up a lot of my time. And the amount of symbols to learn for Mandarin is staggering.
Last year I took up memory training after studying the techniques of a few memory masters. I'm doing everything I can to improve my memory but just skipping to Mandarin right now is not a smart or efficient use of my time.
If you prefer to start right now, there are also plenty of Chinese people desperate for someone to practice their English with, e.g. on https://www.tandem.net/
It seems like a lot of people with moderate computer skills are fulfilling this role. My skills and time would be wasted on such an initiative.
I do think it's good advice to contact some people who are already involved, though. They would best know what else needs to be done.
Honestly, most comments here misunderstood the problem to the point the purposed solutions are ridicules. Go talk to Chinese people living near you. Ask them why things are operating like this. Plenty live in SFBA/Seattle as far as I know.
I don't know any Chinese people living near me. I don't know many people here at all. I would definitely like to talk to people close to the issue.
Right now it's still more of a civilized sparring.
The rest of the world could easily get by by moving production lines and factories to Vietnam and Indonesia and South America, etc, while paying a flat “tax” in increased prices across the board for cheap products.
The USA at least is doing something which respects their sovereignty and reduces their power.
Reports are going to have people claiming one thing and others denying that thing. This is a really serious human rights concern involving MILLIONS of people. It has been going on starting with Falun Gong since 2000 or earlier, then Uyghurs, Tibetans etc. It’s the word of the Chinese government vs all those groups. So it’s pretty clear this stuff is happening, but only because so many disparate groups are claiming this.
But there is nothing like VIDEO to make clear what exactly is happening. We need to have these videos in order to share them. Same as Tienemen Square videos.
I think that the following devices would be REALLY useful not just for human rights but proving what happened in an altercation:
A tiny device that can record video or video, perhaps embedded in the clothing or body of a person.
The stream is ENCRYPTED AND THEN transmitted to local towers or wifi or whatever, and finds its way to some servers. Maybe via a DHT routing.
Anyway, these servers store the encrypted data and the keys are generated by Shamir Secret Sharing so 3 or more parties can come together and decrypt the video.
In countries with rule of law, this could be used to figure out rapes on campus, by having such cameras in every dorm and bedroom. The keys would be obtained during a court case only.
In human rights cases, the keys would be generated by human rights organizations.
So this will eliminate “peeing toms” and “spying” by having warrants for decrypton of a video strean, and curation by trusted agencies what gets shown to the public.
On the other hand, such camps would not look much different from prisons, so I doubt you can expect KZ style pictures.
Edit: just wondering, is my argument really that bad, or am I dealing with patriotic bite reflexes?
I asked for the best VIDEO evidence from inside, showing the most people and smoking guns
It’s the difference between hearsay and video evidence. Like when people say the IDF harasses people in the West Bank, or cops kill unarmed Black people, and people dispute it one way or the other. But having video reveals exactly WHAT is happening. The more context for the video, the better.
And it's quite rude to project such a belief on someone. OP made no statement about their feelings toward mass incarceration, and claiming they are OK with it just because of the country they are in is like saying the Chinese are OK with what's happening in their own country.
But specifically about your question, serious financial crimes are violent. Violence on this case is done by proxy, but abusing the State's position of power to help you on a crime shouldn't clean your hands of the violence.
Financial crimes always boil down to some kind of theft.
Sounds just like the USA. Just look at Snowden or Assange.
The US is an empire comprising the mainland, as well as vassal and occupied states. China has a smaller periphery (Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang, HK, etc.)
If you actually wanted to make this comparison, you would need to compare the treatment of people in the USA's occupied territories, such as Iraq or Palestine, to the worst in China, not the worst in China to the worst in the USA, that by default grants a huge arbitrary importance to national borders. (Although the worst within the USA is very bad). China's appalling assimilation of muslims should be criticized, but Americans rarely draw a baseline comparison to how they deal with large muslim populations (invading their countries, murdering their people, drone-bombing weddings, etc.)
Reminds me of a friend who said "Churchill may have been a belligerent racist, but I'd rather have lived under Churchill than under Stalin!". The assumption is that "soviets" lived "under Stalin", but "englishmen" lived "under Churchill". However, it turns out the victims of Irish and Indian human-made famines also lived "under Churchill". He automatically imagines himself as an english citizen, not an indian subject... and it's not clear why?
Or, to put it more simply, if the middle east or historical comparisons don't work for you, you can just look at the Monroe Doctrine that has been openly re-centered thanks to the efforts to realign Venezuela into American consensus.
If you compare all of China to all of the Americas, you get a much better comparable population + land mass, and you can really contrast how the USA treats peripheral regions: blockades, banana republics, coups, black sites, paramilitaries, etc.
Americans will tell themselves "we may be bad but we are better than the enemy" over and over again, and that is what we will eventually study as the core repeated mantra of American propaganda during its waning years.
As corporations grow more and more important (it's getting harder to do things without a credit card, for example), the government isn't the only important factor here. If the government outsources the punishment to corporations, what difference does it make that the government doesn't punish you for calling them incompetent but the corporations will terminate your accounts, cutting you off from much of modern society? You're getting cut off, because you said something.
It‘s not an isolated phenomenon. It is very widespread.
If they hadn't started the war, they wouldn't have had access to most of the Jews. Only around ~560,000 Jews lived in prewar Germany whereas Poland had over 3 million alone.
The Nazis would've needed the cooperation of the other governments in their plan.
"During the rise of <insert power here> anti<blank> was a worldwide phenomenon. Recall that few countries wanted to take in the <blank> refugees. Had <power> not started the war, they might have gotten away with exterminating all the <blank>."
Substitute for whatever you feel most applicable. A frightening number of variables fit.
And that's about islamophobia? Saudi-Arabia is refusing to help because they hate muslims?
The Sunni-Shia conflict is an ancient one that's also a serious problem in the region for muslims, although how much of it is a religious conflict and how much is just a regular Iran-Saudi power struggle is hard to say.
Yemen is unfortunate in being both strategically located, having little oil, a huge problem with the drug Qat, and rapidly running out of water.
0.7% of the US is in prison, so that would be about 1/10th of the prison population.
I'm not saying US prisons are the same - you get a vaguely proper legal process, and conditions are probably better. You're not likely to have your organs havested. But "a million people" isn't the problem.
Imprisoning someone for drug charges after due process is not the same as imprisoning someone for being the wrong ethnicity.
The moral weight of a life does not change based on the population of a country.
I feel like these statements are pretty close to being axiomatic.
This resemblance doesn't make a lot of sense.
Since China is so big anything they'll do will affect a huge number of people, even if it's not excessive.
"The USSR is bad for its people."
"What about Jim Crow?"
It's also worth noting that there is a bipartisan criminal justice reform movement in the U.S. that is critical of the U.S. government at various levels, so, no, it's not apples to apples.
2) Real War
Lets not forget what stopped nazism!
We've all got strong feelings about politics, but maybe Americans in particular ought to be a little less cavalier about dead foreigners in the name of American idealism.
We can debate Marxism here in the comments, but the fact is that nobody regardless of their political stance should have to worry about being kidnapped or tortured by their government. At that point your government is effectively a gang, of no higher moral ground than a bunch of thugs with guns.
Until China fixes their government, they will never be taken seriously on the same level of other "first world" countries. Unless people passively watch Peking University students (statistically harder to get into than Harvard) get kidnapped by their government and do nothing about it.
I wonder what Chinese people think about the odds of any of this improving.
I think russia has been taken seriously for a century now, with not better track record. What makes your country be taken seriously is your military strength, which is your capacity to flip-off any other country that tries to take political advantage over you.
> I wonder what Chinese people think about the odds of any of this improving.
What I think is that the vast majority of chinese don't care about this topic at all, and would rather not think about it. Remember, most of them dont know about Tiananmen square, not because the government censored it, but because they don't care about it.
In the modern age, it's impossible to keep information out. Any chinese person that left the country has had access to this information, and could have disseminated with virtually no effort.
This is hubris. It won't matter how seriously they are taken if they become the dominant power.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/03/01/how-the-west-go...
Meanwhile, the US is leaving a power vacuum and can't be taken seriously either.
“The government is scared because the domestic contradictions are growing,” Michael said. “Once you study Marxism, you know real socialism and China’s so-called socialism with Chinese characteristics are two different things. They sell fascism as socialism, like a street vendor passes off dog meat as lamb.”
China has been showing us that it can so far.
So here's the archive.is version: http://archive.is/o8uvi