PDA

View Full Version : If You Live In China........



Uncle Frank
Feb 10, 2006, 07:43
don't say anything bad about your government over your computer! Seems YAHOO & GOOGLE and other foreign internet companies will help the Chinese government track you down and punish you. According to tonight's news, if they want to operate inside China, they must do what the Chinese government wants to help track down any disent.

Frank

:okashii:

Ma Cherie
Feb 10, 2006, 09:35
I guess it's true then, it is possible for a society to adopt capitalism and still have strong government control. It's sad really, I thought the whole deal of the modernzation of China was also supposed to help bring Democracy, but it seems that Google and Yahoo are only helping the government in censorship.

bossel
Feb 10, 2006, 10:29
don't say anything bad about your government over your computer! Seems YAHOO & GOOGLE and other foreign internet companies will help the Chinese government track you down and punish you.
Wang has already posted an article (http://www.wa-pedia.com/forum/showpost.php?p=299388&postcount=3) about Google's prostration.

I haven't heard anything about Google tracking down dissidents (& I doubt that they would go so far, though it's possible).

godppgo
Feb 10, 2006, 10:59
During my trip to China I was not able to access several political-related web sites for which I normally could in Canada. I am not sure how effective blocking certain web site is though. With today's world interconnected in so many ways, it would be difficult to hide news from 1.3 billion people. If people really want to know about something, they'll find a way. I think the Chinese government's real intention is to try to prevent people from having an "interest" in finding out things around them.

nurizeko
Feb 28, 2006, 20:55
Why are all the chinese nationals posting everywhere but here?.....especially since they like to add their 2 cents worth about china, why aint they doing it here?.

Also comes no suprise the chinese government is continuing its poor record of freedoms and rights for the people.

Supervin
Feb 28, 2006, 22:42
Why are all the chinese nationals posting everywhere but here?.....especially since they like to add their 2 cents worth about china, why aint they doing it here?.

Also comes no suprise the chinese government is continuing its poor record of freedoms and rights for the people.
Why does it concern you at all? (And for the record, I have posted here myself.)

It's not like the Internet thread was started by a 'Chinese national'.

Void
Feb 28, 2006, 23:10
I guess it's true then, it is possible for a society to adopt capitalism and still have strong government control. It's sad really, I thought the whole deal of the modernzation of China was also supposed to help bring Democracy, but it seems that Google and Yahoo are only helping the government in censorship.
well, and what about this?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/27/google_censors_us_video/
:souka:
and then the disproof is to foloow in many sources...
as i recall there were some other "problems" between google and US government

might be just a misinformation, and might be some truth as well

nurizeko
Mar 1, 2006, 00:34
Why does it concern you at all?

Same applies to you, mine was a ligitimate inquiery.

Makes sense chinese folk would post on the forum for chinese topics.


Im suprised google is helping the chinese governments restrictive policies.

nice gaijin
Mar 1, 2006, 01:45
if they didn't bend to the government's will, they wouldn't be allowed to operate in china, cutting them out of a particularly large market that is already being penetrated by other spineless entrepreneurs like microsoft and yahoo. I'm not surprised one bit...

It's possible no chinese national has noticed this thread yet, or you could be paranoid and say that the government has blocked this subforum :clueless:

Supervin
Mar 1, 2006, 03:37
Im suprised google is helping the chinese governments restrictive policies.

if they didn't bend to the government's will, they wouldn't be allowed to operate in china, cutting them out of a particularly large market that is already being penetrated by other spineless entrepreneurs like microsoft and yahoo. I'm not surprised one bit...
It's possible no chinese national has noticed this thread yet, or you could be paranoid and say that the government has blocked this subforum
It only goes to show that multinational corporations only care about the stockholders' interests without regard for moral scrupples when both are in conflict.

Google has received more flak for its recent succumbing to the Chinese Government's policies, as it has a motto of: "Don't be evil". It just goes to show double standards by these multi's; and moral responsibilities out the window for the sake of reaping the big bucks. One would have thought that Western values would have been unbreakable no matter what, though it would seem that greed works everywhere regardless of context.

BTW, please don't label Chinese members on this forum as 'Chinese nationals' as it emphasizes nationality and allegiance for no good reason. Similarly I wouldn't go around calling the British and American folks here on this forum as 'British nationals' or 'American nationals'. It's fine when you use it in the context of world affairs and politics, but not when you refer to people in a community like on this forum.

About this forum, I don't think the CCP has blocked it - yet. Otherwise a number of users from China wouldn't have been able to register here. I would think that they're rather slack on sites written in English as well because most of the Chinese population only know how to communicate in Chinese and it's not that the Internet police are well versed in English either.

godppgo
Mar 1, 2006, 03:56
BTW, please don't label Chinese members on this forum as 'Chinese nationals' as it emphasizes nationality and allegiance for no good reason. Similarly I wouldn't go around calling the British and American folks here on this forum as 'British nationals' or 'American nationals'. It's fine when you use it in the context of world affairs and politics, but not when you refer to people in a community like on this forum.


I think the reason he used Chinese nationals is because Chinese users on this forum seem to be really sensitive about anything related to their government and country. This is true for all other politically related forums out there where young chinese male usually between the age of 20-35 are really sensitive and emotional when it comes to political topics. I think most of it has to do with the nationalistic crap the CCP has stuffed in their brain at an early age.

Supervin
Mar 1, 2006, 04:26
I think most of it has to do with the nationalistic crap the CCP has stuffed in their brain at an early age.
And it's a real pity. Propaganda fed from birth through State media and State education.

I too have noticed this trend - and in real life - with quite a lot of Chinese people from China, especially those who haven't a clue about current affairs from a view different from those given (or forced) by the CCP. It takes me forever to tell them what I'm getting at because I have to debunk so much of the propaganda in their heads at the outset. From what I keep hearing, it would seem that the CCP have brainwashed the majority into thinking that China cannot live with its existence and that it serves as China's 'mother'.

However, there are a minority who are educated enough to know that they're living in a suppressed and authoritarian country, or if some of their family members used to serve the KMT, have relatives in Hong Kong or Taiwan, or survived through the Cultural Revolution.

Still, it would be unjustified to impose the improper label of 'Chinese nationals' simply because of a number of individuals.

nurizeko
Mar 1, 2006, 20:37
Actually when i say Chinese nationals it means just that, a national of china, a citizen born and bred in china.
It works for British nationals, French nationals Russian nationals, nationals is a legitimate word which is used without issue by customs and immigration authorities all the world over.
I am a british national, i was born live work and plan on dying in britain, i have a british passport, british citizenship, hence i am a british national.
That is all it means, it doesnt have any link to nationalism, im sorry for the misunderstand, but, your understanding of the word was flawed.
Now if i said i was a british nationalist, THEN it would carry the negetive meaning you were thinking of.

Edit: And i agree, many chinese posters here do seem to have an almost propaganda agent type of opinion in regard to their government, on several occassions ivd been convinced they are working for the chinese government, but then, i probably under-estimated how well the chinese propaganda works on the public in general.

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 00:30
nationals is a legitimate word which is used without issue by customs and immigration authorities all the world over.
I didn't say 'national' was an illegitimate word. Note also the context you quote in addition to those I quoted where the word is used.

It wouldn't be appropriate to use it in a community forum as, like I said, it emphasizes nationality and allegiance of individuals. This has nothing to do with nationalists as you brought up - which are supporters of an ideology.

For instance, saying 'British' is enough to denote that someone is from Britain or has that nationality. Saying 'British national' would be putting emphasis on nationality, but is necessary in situations where you're dealing with world affairs and immigration when different nationals are at issue.

Elizabeth
Mar 2, 2006, 08:02
I think the reason Chinese nationals was used here is that it is a useful distinction in discussions like this to distinguish Chinese citizens of China from members of Chinese descent living elsewhere. Anyone of Chinese ancestry can claim to be Chinese, in contrast to American or British that alone imply residency and /or citizenship of the particular country.

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 08:23
I think the reason Chinese nationals was used here is that it is a useful distinction in discussions like this to distinguish Chinese citizens of China from members of Chinese descent living elsewhere. Anyone of Chinese ancestry can claim to be Chinese, in contrast to American or British that alone imply residency and /or citizenship of the particular country.
The distinction can simply be made by saying 'members from China'. The word 'nationals' has political connotations, suitable for other contexts. Similarly, it won't be appropriate to term those from the US as 'American nationals' for the sake of distinguishing those living in Japan for instance.

Elizabeth
Mar 2, 2006, 08:45
The distinction can simply be made by saying 'members from China'. The word 'nationals' has political connotations, suitable for other contexts. Similarly, it won't be appropriate to term those from the US as 'American nationals' for the sake of distinguishing those living in Japan for instance.
What should have been said was anyone living in China under the current restrictions, including foreigners but excluding Chinese citizens living abroad. And no one is suggesting American national be used for expatriates unless American were an ethnicity with significant, even majority, populations in countries around the world besides the US where I dare say, though, very few would be offended by the term.

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 09:19
What should have been said was anyone living in China under the current restrictions, including foreigners but excluding Chinese citizens living abroad.
Yes, and I would reckon 'members from China' encapsulates the bulk of this meaning. Those living abroad don't normally call themselves 'from China' anymore.


And no one is suggesting American national be used for expatriates...
You misunderstand me; 'American nationals' as to those living in the US only (not expatriates).


I dare say, though, very few would be offended by the term.
Perhaps, though it's down to the individual.

Elizabeth
Mar 2, 2006, 09:37
As far as I know, the full and final meaning of American national is having American citizenship. We generally don't stop claiming our birthright en masse after leaving although the Chinese I happen to know don't stop saying they are from China either. Presumably Americans living in Japan would still be American citizens in contrast to a hypothetical country of "Americans" analogous to "ethnic Chinese" in any number of places around the world that they would need distinguishing from with the label national or citizen.

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 10:52
Let's review what we've reached so far.

What I'm saying is that 'national',
(a) refers to those living in their country of origin, where automatically they would also acquire citizenship of that country (e.g. Chinese living in China, Americans living in the USA, Britons living in the UK and so on),
and
(b) is used in political contexts as well as for immigration and world affairs, which would be inappropriate here.

You initially said that 'nationals' is used for:

... a useful distinction ... to distinguish Chinese citizens of China from members of Chinese descent living elsewhere.

And now you're suggesting that 'national' equates to citizenship only, i.e. not confined to where they live:

As far as I know, the full and final meaning of American national is having American citizenship. ... Presumably Americans living in Japan would still be American citizens ...

But then what you say now completely negates what you said earlier - if 'national' is not restricted to residing in the country of origin and citizenship, then there is no function of distinguishing between those residing there and abroad.

nice gaijin
Mar 2, 2006, 13:20
whoops I didn't realize I was being addressed earlier and ignored the post...

nurizeko and elizabeth are completely right about my intentions: I meant no political connotations or affiliations when I used the term "chinese nationals;" I was simply using the term I had seen used previously in this thread and others to identify members residing in mainland China (as opposed to, as Elizabeth put it, those of Chinese descent living outside of China).

"Members from China" would also be acceptable I suppose, but it does seem to include those who are originally from China but are no longer residents. If I had known that the term "Chinese National" would make anyone so upset, I wouldn't have used it, but to me it didn't seem like it implied anything other than "someone of Chinese Nationality." At least that was all I intended by using the term.

Elizabeth
Mar 2, 2006, 13:39
Let's review what we've reached so far.
What I'm saying is that 'national',
(a) refers to those living in their country of origin, where automatically they would also acquire citizenship of that country (e.g. Chinese living in China, Americans living in the USA, Britons living in the UK and so on),
and
Unfortunately, I am not versed in the detailed requirements for American citizenship although it is common knowledge that being born in the US or in an American controlled jurisdiction bestows automatic citizenship regardless of length of time actually 'lived' or 'bred' there. Certainly it isn't anything that is automatically revokable for citizens living abroad. Americans in Japan that haven't given up their American citizenship are still nationals in the technical sense of definition 1.

Obviously the Chinese referrant is much more ambiguous as an inclusive ethnic term that can be used pretty much by anyone to identify themselves as Chinese descent (living in Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Canada, America etc) that has never set foot in China and has no intention of becoming a citizen or even long-term resident. If this wasn't clear enough already....in this case, therefore, the Chinese national label becomes a useful point of distinction to clarify it is only citizens of China that are a target of discussion.

godppgo
Mar 2, 2006, 16:28
Obviously the Chinese referrant is much more ambiguous as an inclusive ethnic term that can be used pretty much by anyone to identify themselves as Chinese descent (living in Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Canada, America etc) that has never set foot in China and has no intention of becoming a citizen or even long-term resident. If this wasn't clear enough already....in this case, therefore, the Chinese national label becomes a useful point of distinction to clarify it is only citizens of China that are a target of discussion.

Yes Chinese is probably the most ambiguous nationality in the world. For me the best way to describe "real" Chinese (one who holds a PRC passport) is to use the term China citizen. Sounds awkward but I can't really find a more clear way to call a Chinese.

nurizeko
Mar 2, 2006, 18:11
I think the reason Chinese nationals was used here is that it is a useful distinction in discussions like this to distinguish Chinese citizens of China from members of Chinese descent living elsewhere. Anyone of Chinese ancestry can claim to be Chinese, in contrast to American or British that alone imply residency and /or citizenship of the particular country.
Bingo Elizabeth :cool:


The distinction can simply be made by saying 'members from China'.

I mean no disrespect, seriously, but that is heading in the direction of unjustified PC.
The simple fact is the word national, is a ligitimate word to describe someones nationality.

national

• adjective 1 relating to or characteristic of a nation. 2 owned, controlled, or financially supported by the state.

• noun a citizen of a particular country.

\ DERIVATIVES nationally adverb.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/national?view=uk

It has NO nationalistic or patriotic meaning, it is merely a neutral word to describe the status of someones citizenship, place of origin, where they live.

The word you concerned about is NATIONALIST and fortunately it hasnt been used at all apart from my attempts to educate you on the meaning of national in comparisson to the word your mistaking it for.

Finally, in conclusion to this now clearly defined difference between the two words, patriotism isnt a crime, and secondly, Nationalist is really the wonly word to describe the majority opinions of some chinese posters here.

I need not go into the reasons why, were all familiar to varying degrees the level of government conditioning that goes on with their people.

I hope the national issue has been cleared up and your now quite familiar with its one and only neutral legitimate meaning. :wave:

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 22:02
Obviously the Chinese referrant is much more ambiguous ... themselves as Chinese descent (living in Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Canada, America etc) that has never set foot in China and has no intention of becoming a citizen or even long-term resident. If this wasn't clear enough already....in this case, therefore, the Chinese national label becomes a useful point of distinction to clarify it is only citizens of China that are a target of discussion.
Look, read. You said that the term 'national' refers only to citizenship. So the distinction does not exist. I'm not going to quote you again; I quoted you in the last post.

Those living abroad who have "never set foot in China" in the places you've mentioned would be Taiwanese, Singaporean, Malaysian, Indonesian, Chinese-Canadian and Chinese-American. They wouldn't call themselves 'from China' because that would denote that they live there, although they would call themselves Chinese.

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 22:24
Nurizeko, for the last time, I know what the heck a 'national' and a 'nationalist' is, if not more than you do, if you had read my posts. I'm not even going to bother quoting my own posts.

I never said anything about 'national' being not PC; this is a forum, not politics. Stop making false accusations.

'National' is suitable for different CONTEXTS, for the umpteenth time. Like you quoted yourself, it's been used in immigration context because there is a need to distinguish those individuals with different nationalities, else it would be ambiguous. Here, in these forums, it's not necessary, because 'members from China' will suffice.

Supervin
Mar 2, 2006, 22:26
That's it, I'm not going to respond to any of the posts here anymore until people address my points directly and not just sprouting whatever comes to mind.

nurizeko
Mar 2, 2006, 23:16
Your choice if you want to discontinue contributing to this thread with that attitude, but im merely pointing out national is allowed. if you understood (and better then me you seem to have implied) the meaning of national, then why did you oppose its usage?.....it only has two meanings, for an individual in describing where they come from and their citizenship to things such as organizations and bodies asociated with a particular country.

It is used in the contect to indicate origin, status, nothing more, im sorry if its bothering you, im merely defending the right to use it, and pointing out its distinct meaning from the word you want, which is nationalist, if you know the difference, you shouldnt have made it an issue.

Back on topic, i reckon the government of googles home turf (america?) should take action against google for aiding china's supressive regime.

What i find odd is most of the world seems happy to see china as progressive, but its still a country where people dissappear right?.....of course im not naive enough to believe in a perfect world where morals and ethics can always be held above all, but, its just sad theres only a precious few that still saying "hey, china is still not 100% good on this human rights issue? what can we do?"

I can only hope that this method of courting china and slowly guiding it to change is ultimately worth the decade or more, or even longer of continued human rights abuses.

Then again, most countries cant really talk. :souka:

nice gaijin
Mar 3, 2006, 01:54
Supervin, I'm surprised at how stand-offish you are becoming over your narrow (and apparently unshared) definition of a single term. I don't think anyone has ignored the points you made, but they are merely stating that the political connotations you refer to are much more apparent in other terms that sound similar. The term might not be "necessary" on a forum like this, but it does not make the term incorrect or implicit of any negative, political, or subversive meanings.

nurizeko, you've stumbled upon a new topic when you start talking about the US government taking action against google for being complicit with the Chinese government. The human rights issues and such makes for a huge argument for sanctions against China, but it is too powerful economically and we already depend on its cheap labor far too much to try and take such action without the backing of a large body of supporting nations. This is an interesting direction for the thread to take, don't hesitate in pursuing it.

bossel
Mar 3, 2006, 10:01
Back on topic, i reckon the government of googles home turf (america?) should take action against google for aiding china's supressive regime.
The US then should at first take action against themselves for aiding oppressive regimes all over the world (& much more actively than Google does).


What i find odd is most of the world seems happy to see china as progressive, but its still a country where people dissappear right?
China is progressing, that doesn't mean that everything's perfect, though.


"hey, china is still not 100% good on this human rights issue? what can we do?"
There are a precious many who think that way. But most probably sanctions & boycots wouldn't help very much. Better is to talk to Chinese & try to make them aware. There are enough Chinese in the world who have contact to free media & who will go back to China. This is only a silent & slow revolution, but it's going on. The question is what will succeed earlier: The silent revolution or the violent one caused by the injustice of the system (particularly towards the peasants).

4321go
Mar 3, 2006, 10:18
About this topic: there have already this one:http://www.wa-pedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20199

Rome was not built overnight, but niether was it downfall. China was made over 32 millenia of recorded history; and the many jobs must be an employment project to temporarily deal with the national welfare as well as training its citizens to be more computer literate, comparable to the New Deal.
In the meantime, the Spring of Beijing is marching on !
China can only go up in economy, national defense, and liberalism under the new motto of "Return to Confucius !"
The reactionaries to revised, open communism can only excercise their last feeble struggle for a guarantee comparable to that of N.Korea, though of a less degree of intensity. The rest of the world could help by smoothing the transition; mindless attacks on the CCP is not wise imho. I wish the US would only step in with all-friendly intentions.
edit: Sorry about the type-o in 32 millenia; I had meant to say 3.2 millenia. In the meantime, I might add that looking at N.Korea's dilapidated state of general welfare of its citizenry, I think the PRC gov'l figures are well aware of the dangers of extreme information control. However putting Taiwan and Tibet issues at the forefront to undermine the aspirations of 1.3 billion Chinese individuals is not very helpful. According to Epoch Times more than 5 million CCP members have left the Party. I just think pushing and cornering the CCP might be a bad move. A steady flow of genuinely friendly messages towards China and its citizens would actually bring down the hightened guard as they have been unduely violated before. I hope the same would apply to N.Korea while at it. :)

There are always hostile force around~ unhealthy, and incorrect China bashing around ,which consider China as an potential threat.
What role China will play in the future?
so ,stop talking anything bad about China,I know it more than you ,and what is more! I can change it ,but you can't ~ you will be welcome when you tell me your thinking about how to make the this country more better ,more strong~!

cyberryo
Mar 3, 2006, 19:53
Originally Posted by Supervin: About this forum, I don't think the CCP has blocked it - yet. Otherwise a number of users from China wouldn't have been able to register here. I would think that they're rather slack on sites written in English as well because most of the Chinese population only know how to communicate in Chinese and it's not that the Internet police are well versed in English either.
I agree with Supervin. I was accessing the forum during my business trips to China in Jan and Feb too, and didn`t have any problem either.
But I do experience times when I could not download emails from my email server in Singapore. Strangely, when I tried to access yahoo singapore, I was referred to yahoo china. But I had no problem accessing yahoo itself?!! Must be a yahoo thing, rather than anything linked to govt.
In the 1990s when I visited China, the hotels are manned by policeman and we had to be careful what we say. For the past few years, the hotels I stayed in China all have broadband, and there`s relatively more freedom for foreign visitors to China. I think that that`s progress already. :)
Ken

nurizeko
Mar 3, 2006, 21:06
About this topic: there have already this one:http://www.wa-pedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20199
There are always hostile force around~ unhealthy, and incorrect China bashing around ,which consider China as an potential threat.
What role China will play in the future?
so ,stop talking anything bad about China,I know it more than you ,and what is more! I can change it ,but you can't ~ you will be welcome when you tell me your thinking about how to make the this country more better ,more strong~!

Nobody is considoring china a threat, money is the new power, wars are fought on the stock exchange and trade, its the people of china we are worried about, i guess a great many of us are just too darn impatient for the day when someone doesnt dissappear in china for saying the wrong thing about the government.