China published "The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2011"

It seems to me from your posts in this thread that you are using China as cover for expressing your own personal opinions. IMO, it would be more effective if you were more direct.

It further seems to me that ATW is doing exactly what China is doing - saying your **** stinks too. Whether that is effective, of course, is a fundamental question posed by this thread.

And the two of you are a microcosm for US-China diplomatic bickering. Everybody is talking past everybody else. You all are only spanking the figurative intellectual monkey and nobody is going to give serious thought to the validity of the other side's points.

 

Yes, because the report is clearly crap to anyone who lives in the U.S., and you're from the UAE. When we start deporting homosexuals, indenturing housekeepers and mandating birth rates, then the domestic human rights report written by China from the UAE guy will have merit. But you and I both know that won't happen, now or in the next 50 years. This forum will get a lot more stressful if you continue to be this obtuse, the reason you're not getting 20 posts about the UAE is because we know there are one or two posters who will do it well enough.

 

With the exception of some crazy @ss jingoists, I don't think anybody believes the Communist Party of the PRC sits around and talks about how jealous they are of the United States.

And the State Department's intention with these reports is to reach out to China, and help foster a discussion that will help improve human rights. We can all see from China's response how well that's worked out.

The juxtaposition of you being the United States in our microcosm, and the Americans being in the position of the offended Chinese is amusing to me. The way that you are taken aback by any sort of backlash at your well-meaning attempt to provoke discussion and thought is very similar to the reaction from the US government when the Chinese push back at their report.

 

This is far more solid ground for critiques about the U.S. than the earlier stuff about domestic human rights. It still doesn't invalidate ATW's prerogative to post a rebuttal regarding your own country.

 

I can say "well, if Mathloom had started out talking about problems in Bahrain, he could say he was trying to foster an honest discussion, but instead he is just attacking America". But being you, you of course are a slave to your perspective, and your first thought wouldn't be to call yourself out. That is just reality. People are blind to their own flaws.

I think you are making a mistake in thinking this is a calculated plan to attack China. Such a plan makes no sense if they are really the diabolical masterminds. No upside. Rather, my signature used to be "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." and I think that is pretty accurate here all around. Everybody is blinded by their own perspective. The core idea behind these reports was not overtly malicious. As a product of an amalgamation of constituencies, I'm sure some malice and fear creep into the process, but at the core it means well, no matter how blunderingly heavy handed it is in practice. I think that you are making a mistake in trying to use these reports as some sort of jumping-off point for discussions about what is wrong with America. The militant politicians don't give a rats ass about these reports. They will cherry pick for quotes that make their point, but they will do that with anything that they can locate.

My point from the beginning is that trying to directly tell someone they are wrong or at fault is a waste of time for the US government, and a waste of time for you. And it's probably going to be a waste of time for me here, but you seem to think my attempts to be indirect and draw a broad picture were setting up a personal attack on you?

I think you are probably making a mistake in thinking of the United States Government as a monolithic entity of one mind. I know that is a problem that I have to guard against when thinking about large groups like the governments of other countries.

In any case, a psychiatrist will never tell his patient, "this is what is wrong with you" because the first reaction from the patient is always to push back and deny that it is so. Rather, what they do is set things up with questions to lead you to the point that you are forced to see the problems/issues yourself. My initial point was that you are probably wasting your time, and I don't think you are going to get the result you are looking for, but if anything will get the opposite. And in saying it directly, you will, if you are a normal human being, promptly push back against what I am saying, at which point we are right back at the beginning.

 

Exactly.

Yup, that was my point.

 

Folks, this is real.

 

Time to move from the US to China.

 

At time, such as this time, Beijing acts like an awkward kid. It's a freaking disgrace for anybody to be associated with it.

While I do not agree CCP do not care about the Chinese people, anybody that lives in China knows basic human rights in China are not respected, not least for citizens with no political sway. One indicator is that even the rich can't wait to get out of China. The elusive communist's utopian state remains highest priority that trumps human rights, and that goal is too often hijacked by the power to justify its selfish agenda.

Now, U.S. does have a lot of problems of her own. But one thing I can be sure of is at least anybody can argue his/her case fairly in an independent judiciary system where basic human rights are respected. That's probably the best the human race can do to ensure human rights realistically.

 

How many people in non-Hong Kong China have deeded ownership of their land or home? How many couples in China can choose how many children to have without paying ridiculous 'taxes' for having 2+ (in separate births)?

 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. In China citizens are allowed to "lease" the land for 99 years without paying taxes. It's also fairly easy to "re-buy" your land. My last year's property tax was $3,000 so I can't really say I own the land in the truest sense.

You're correct about the 1 child policy, though minority groups are allowed to have more, including a large African population in South China. It sucks but considering the overpopulation issues they have, it's understandable, if not justifiable.

China is definitely an authoritarian government, but not a totalitarian. When I was there, I've heard citizens talk trash about the government in front of a cop. As long as you don't organize or use the media to protest, you would be surprised at the amount of lower level freedom afforded. I'm talking about being able to literally drive on the sidewalk. Or smoke in any restaurant, 12yr/olds buying beer and business license to sell on the streets... nope. Females are never turned away from malls. Western fashion influences are allowed, as evident in the way young girls are dressed. So there's a big distinction between authoritarian and totalitarian. Once there's an open protest or anti-government publication... all bets are off. You're going to get house arrested and your wife beaten.

I'm not defending the government by any means. I still think they're made up of gangsters who are afraid of anything that threaten their absolute power (as with most single party governments). However, they're really smart about allowing what it's citizens can do and see, just enough to be content and drunk on patriotism. It's lessons learned from Tiananmen square and it's enough to keep them in power for a very long time. What I would love to see is Taiwanese-like form of direct democracy.

Most ex-pats who's lived in China, who can stand the bad air, rude people and stifling bureaucracy, don't feel threatened by the government as do 90% of the population.

 

I actually think it is justifiable. When over-population threatens living of everyone in the country, pouplation measures, I think, may be justified to address the problem so everybody at least has enough to live on. China did not adopt such policy for nothing, and I think China did have a population crisis at the time of adopting the policy. Of course, there is no free lunch. China is facing the consequence of its choice, a vastly aging society and the decay effects of that. Having said that, I do not endorse harsh and brutal measures taken by the local officials to carry out the policy. But is procreation a human right? Should one be able to give as many birth as she wants and let the rest of society take the burden of rearing the childern? I think at least that's debatable. To me, there are two sides of the equation involved, and balancing is required.

As to other human rights, you mentioned there is no freedom to political speech which is important. In addition, almost all other gurantteed rights in the US consitution are missing in China. For example, in criminal proceedings, the suspect is subject to prosection's investigation pretty much in any way the prosecution wants, there is no 4th,5th amendment right whatsoever for a Chinese. I can go on and on.

For a long time before 1979, even the basic rights like personal body integrity, property rights, safty, privacy are not gurantteed in China. After 79, largely driven by economic needs, China has put protection of those as priority. But old habits die hard. Even those rights can be comprimised at the mercy of one or two officials, e.g. Chen Guangbiao.

No China is not middle east or north korea, but China has not relented communist's goals in the Constitution and they can trump anybody's basic human rights at any time as the power sees fit.

 

Well, I don't disagree with you on the human rights issue. Believe me, I'm not fan of China's government. I'm just pointing out that it's very self aware of the problems of a totalitarian control and cleverly allows just enough low level freedom to remain in power... and with the support of most of it's people.