I am troubled by your purposeful misrepresentations concerning freedom of speech. Mr. Elliot (not Elliott) Madison was not arrested because he used Twitter. He was arrested because of his involvement in the protest. That has nothing to do with Iran, which prevented people from using Twitter in the first place. The difference between the two cases are beyond clear. I am disappointed and troubled by the fact that a person of your intelligence failed to see the difference. I could only conclude that this is intentional.
reply "doesnotmatter":
That is why western countries picking on China and all the developing countries for democracy and human rights issues with the standard they set. They don't want developing country to develope.It's to their benefit if China have many voices on everything and can never accomplish anything. Like Taiwan!
doesnotmatter 發表評論於
I do not support the separation between Google and China. BaiDu need competition. competition helps each other healthy and strong.
I do not think that google is leaving china either. what it does essentially is to give up using the cn domain name. google.com is still there, I do not think that it will be blocked altogether.
it is more of a political and marketing thing.
修車師傅 發表評論於
井底望天所作的是類比推理。類比推理是一種弱的推理方法。但很能迷惑人。幾乎任何事實都可以舉出反例。這裏問題的實質是：民主國家是三權分立。政府不能判一個人犯罪。法庭根據法律判案，陪審團根據法律判案。陪審團由你和我這樣的普通人組成，不代表政府，也不受政府控製。犯罪嫌疑人可以得到公正的辯護。在中國這樣的獨裁製度，政府和法庭都是共產黨控製。法庭可以不按法律判案，而按黨的指示判案。法庭可以不講法律，不講道理。律師為犯罪嫌疑人做合法的辯護，律師也會受到迫害。所以，劉曉波的案例，豈可與Elliot Madison 案類比！在民主國家，政府受到法律的製約，受到輿論的製約，受到國會的製約。在中國這樣的獨裁製度，共產黨控製一切，不受製約。所以，隻要在黨內官大，就可以不講道理，不講法律（自己定的法律），也可以貪汙腐敗。
doesnotmatter 發表評論於
larger countries have nuclear weapons, and they want to restrict small countries from developing that; it make sense, as the more country have nuclear, the dangerous is the world. think further, does it really make sense? if we take a country as a person, and apply democracy/human rights to the united nations, then it should be that either that all countries are free to develop nuclear weapons, or that none of them are allowed to have them, those who have need to destroy all of them.
Apparently, the earth did not achieve that level of democracy and human right yet. the concept of democracy and human right is still developing, it is relative and objective.
It is no doubt that US has achieved better on democracy and human rights, than china and lots of other countries, but it does not mean that any country has the rights to demand other countries to jump to the same level.
There is no evidence that the same level of democracy and human rights as advocated by US can bring the most happiness and healthiness to the people in another country.
Consider the reform of US health care system, compare it with the reform of chinese health care system (from government to insurance),the scope of change are not at the same level; If Obama is a hero for the US health system reform,
for the US government to handle a reform of a scope similar to that done in china, I cannot imagine how many heros are required, and how many generations's effort are required.
there are 10 more such reforms taking place in parallel in China, such as tax, housing, education, etc, it is an unbelievable achievement. Although some people were not benefited or negatively impacted from those activities, I believe that the country in a whole does, and many people think that it was a good move.
Compare China and US, they are at two different developmental stages and facing different issues.
for the balance between fairness and efficiency, two different governments score quite differently.
For China in a whole, I think that it benefits from the efficiency and the speed of transform. US does not need that speed any more, since it is a "developed" country.
until the boundary of country disappear, a strong country takes more advantages from the shared resource on the globe. it is to china's benefit to become strong. there are different ways to achieve that, did china find the best way? maybe not, but the achievement is not bad so far.
Now lets talk about the democracy and human rights. what happen if china have the same level of that as US? it is good for the people who is living there (at least to the eyes of western people). can it still achieve the efficiency and speed in the race to become strong?
Elliot Madison 的例子舉錯了，google 一下，大把Elliot Madison的報道，對他的起訴也撤了（google Elliot Madison drop).美國對在阿富汗抓到的來自新疆的恐怖分子的處理才是你說的“打你的是自由戰士，打俺的是恐怖分子“。美國當然不完美，也有過肮髒的曆史，但硬說美國現在也象中國一樣搞白色恐怖，封鎖新聞是睜眼說瞎話。另外，在美國威脅說要槍擊很可能被理解成是實實在在的威脅，那就不在是言論自由的範圍了
From my perspective, there are two main reasons why Google did what it did:
1, Market share It only has small market share in China, far behind Baidu. This would bring it free publication all around the world, certainly attract many Chinese's attention and many who try it now even if they never used google before just by curiosity.
2. It is joint in hip with US government to play the political game. It's a difficult time for US internationally, especially the relation with China. SO this stone would kill two birds. Force China to deal with the so called "freedom" issue and turn attention away from economics and US relation, while US draw up their strategy on what to do with China for the next step.
中國政府限製GOOGLE和"井底望天"所描述的(本人暫時不想核實描述準確性)Twitter和Marc A. Hall事件是同一種性質?"井底望天"有水平!
GOOGLE沒有用Twitter,沒有編歌!GOOGLE提供了民眾知曉Twitter事件和編歌的渠道!"井底望天"也在講述Twitter事件和編歌!如果GOOGLE應該被限製,"井底望天"同樣應該被限製,既"井底望天"閉嘴!
I have read many of your great essays, strongly support. Could you give some hints on what journeys you often read, like Foreign Affairs, The Economist, etc?
