I wonder if they'll ask back the one they gave to Obama after the revelation of the little AIDS experiment we did 60 years ago. Probably won't though, considering what a joke the nobel peace prize has become anyway.
You are pathetic. You and the others making excuses for the barbarity of the Chinese ruling class and their sad, continuing effort to keep a virtual wall around China. Liu Xiaobo is in good company. Previous Nobel Peace Prize-winning dissidents: 2003 Iranian lawyer and activist Shirin Ebadi 1991 Aung San Suu Kyi, Burmese pro-democracy campaigner and opposition leader 1983 Lech Walesa, head of Poland's Solidarity trade union movement that spearheaded the east European anti-communist movement 1980 Adolfo Esquivel, Argentine human rights activist imprisoned during the country's "dirty war" 1975 Andrei Sakharov, Russian top nuclear physicist, human rights campaigner 1960 Albert Lutuli, South African anti-apartheid campaigner 1935 Carl von Ossietzky, German journalist imprisoned by the Nazis in 1933
LMFAO. You understand the main issue wasn't military action right? The business end of the wars was the imposition of a battery of Unequal Treaties. The wars were just the wedge to open up China to exploitation by the West. The macro issue was the refusal of Western powers, primarily the British, of entreating the Chinese government as equals. They had the usual manufactured reasons but the justification was a largely racist ideal of what constituted legitimate government. The British crown (and those of Europe) derived its moral authority by investiture of the moral authority of GOD to oversee the well-being of his people. While the Orientals were factional, corrupt, cruel, cared nothing of their people and ruled primarily through power. Being this the West had no moral duty to treat China as an equal legitimate entity: Britain refused to recognize its sovereign rights to govern itself as it saw fit, to regulate trade or even defend itself or maintain its borders. The motivation may have been economic but the tool they used was a superior Western morality to justify their actions. I mean look at this crazy ****. According to the minutes of the House of Commons debate in 1840, the British foreign secretary Lord Henry John Temple justified the 1st Opium War thus: So the British are in the process of invading China and burning out its ports and forcibly introducing a narcotic onto its people for economic gain but the Chinese are (by their nature) the amoral ones. That's awesome. To contemporary Chinese the argument is that US meddling in the affairs of China continues to reflect a refusal to treat the Chinese government as an equal after 150 years... this time using civil rights as the wedge to "open" China. China may abide on its end with international law in every respect but there's still this lingering sectionalism that refuses to acknowledge China's equal moral authority. I mean 20 years ago when Tiananmen happened what was going on in the US? Cops were pulling over people for the color of their skin and beating the **** out of them on the streets of LA. Gays were systematically being discriminated against. Asian kids were placed in quotas at every top university in the US and being denied fair access based on nothing but their race. China has Tibet but we have the West Bank, which American dollars make possible. The primary difference is that the Chinese don't insist that we're below them morally and b**** all the time to us about how to run our own country while we in the US claim we believe in self-determinism as the highest principle of government but seek to deny others' (Chinese, Muslims, etc) that same sovereign right when we don't agree with them. It's a legitimate argument, not one that I personally subscribe to but definitely not outrageous in many parts of the world, including in East Asia and the Middle East. The blanket refusal to believe that America (and the West) may be operating with a secondary agenda in regards to China just shows how insular our worldview is. As for linking the Tea Party to Communism... lol. It's hard to think of a legitimate extant political philosophy in the world more disparate from Communism than what those Rascal-riders believe in. It makes about as much sense as linking Nazi Fascism with Marxist Socialism. Nice to know that you have the luxury of lumping all the evil people in the world you oppose into one group. I'm sure they deserve it. I say with sincerity that I wish I had the peace of mind that sort of simple absolutism must afford. As for Liu Xiaobo. Well, better him than Obama. Not that Obama might not one day deserve the prize but at least Liu has done something and has taken a bullet for his beliefs. I don't have a problem with the NPP if it reflects at least a sincere moral conviction. This guy seems to have that unlike some past winners.
Really though, do any of you all actually think subversive speech is truly tolerated anywhere? By all accounts Germany is a democratic nation but Nazi related speech is illegal. Put in other words, talking unorthodox about a historical phenomena from the last millennium is ILLEGAL. Even disputing some numbers related to that phenomena is ILLEGAL. Having a little piece of cloth related to that historical phenomena is ILLEGAL. Meanwhile there are dudes in China representing a clear and present danger talking about actually subverting the existing government. I mean no one is arguing that the USA or Germany is an illegitimate government, but those are real world arguments against the PRC: that it shouldn't exist or is illegitimate. In that case why wouldn't they take it seriously? Why do we spend our time judging what they do in their own country? Do we not have something more pressing concerning China we need to get off our asses about? If you're an American who believes in self-determination it shouldn't bother you much more than the fact that Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are being persecuted for the exercise of their self-determination. I wonder how many of you passing judgment on China has actually been there? As an American passing through China what worries me about China is how they have 160 cities with a population of a million+. How they have more millionaires in the country than North Korea has PEOPLE. How they're basically adding the output of a Houston-sized economy every year to their country. How their people look fit, happy and prosperous and how they're becoming rich at our benefit, not how they run their own **** over there.
It's the same mentality that Europeans think Africa would be better off under European management, or Australians used to take children of indigenous people to live with the whites, or Liu's claim that China would be better off as a colony for 300 years...and so on. Maybe, but the history has sailed by. I do pray for world peace.
I wonder what would happen if the US decided to arrest people for subversion. A lot of people would be in jail.
An excellent choice. They had to do something after last years debacle in giving it to Obama. Don't get me wrong Obama is a largely a breath of fresh air after Dubya, but that peace prize selection was poor.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39588135/ns/world_news-asiapacific Nobel Peace Prize winner's wife has 'disappeared,' lawyer says 'We're very concerned that the government might use this as a pretext for detaining her,' human rights activist says JINZHOU, China — The world's newest Nobel Peace Prize winner remained unreachable in a Chinese prison Saturday, while his wife's mobile phone was cut off and the authoritarian government continued to censor reports about democracy campaigner Liu Xiaobo's honor. Police kept reporters away from the prison where Liu is serving an 11-year sentence for subversion, and his lawyer said that Liu's wife — who had been hoping to visit him Saturday and tell him the news of the award — has "disappeared" and he is worried she may be in police custody. Chinese authorities, who called Liu a criminal shortly after his award Friday and said his winning "desecrates the prize," sank Saturday into official silence. Only an editorial in the state-run Global Times newspaper spoke out Saturday, saying in English, "Obviously, the Nobel Peace Prize this year is meant to irritate China, but it will not succeed. On the contrary, the committee disgraced itself." The paper's Chinese-language edition called the award "an arrogant showcase of Western ideology" and said it disrespected the Chinese people. But one Chinese newspaper cartoonist, Kuang Biao, posted an image on his blog Friday of a Nobel prize medal behind bars. In naming Liu, the Norwegian-based Nobel committee honored his more than two decades of advocacy for human rights and peaceful democratic change — from the Tiananmen Square demonstrations in 1989 to a manifesto for political reform that he co-authored in 2008 and which led to his latest jail term. President Barack Obama, last year's peace prize winner, called for Liu's immediate release. 'We are all worried' But there was still no word from the winner himself. The mobile phone of his wife, Liu Xia, was turned off Saturday as she was expected to be en route with police to the prison to meet her husband. "She's disappeared. We're all worried about them," Liu's lawyer, Shang Baojun, told The Associated Press on Saturday. He said even Liu Xia's mother had been unable to reach her. Liu's wife's freedom of movement had been shrinking since the eve of the Nobel announcement when, she said, police came to her apartment to try to get her out of Beijing, offering her a prison visit with Liu. She wanted to stay for the announcement and planned to hold an impromptu news conference with reporters. But police would not let her leave the apartment and on Friday night, she said she was negotiating terms to visit Liu on Saturday and tell him the news. Police often force political critics, religious dissenters and sometimes their family members to leave Beijing ahead of sensitive anniversaries, often putting them up in guesthouses and keeping them out of the way for days and weeks. Beth Schwanke with the Washington-based Freedom Now, an organization that serves as Liu's international counsel, said, "We're very concerned that the government might use this as a pretext for detaining her." Liu's wife has said she hopes to go to Norway to collect the Nobel medal and its prize money of 10 million Swedish kronor (about $1.5 million), if he cannot. Two years into an 11-year jail term at the prison 300 miles from Beijing, the slight, 54-year-old literary critic was not expected to find out about the award until the meeting with his wife. Release unlikely Shang said it was not likely that winning the prize would have any big effect on Liu's prison sentence. "Unless (President) Hu Jintao signs some sort of special order ... but there's no precedent for that," the lawyer said. In past years, China would release certain dissidents after international pressure, but not because they won major awards. Liu is the first peace prize winner chosen while serving a criminal prison sentence, although several laureates, including Myanmar democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi (1991) and German pacifist Carl von Ossietzky (1935) were in custody without a legal trial. Still others, like Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov (1975) and Polish Solidarity leader Lech Walesa (1983), were prevented by their governments from going to Norway to accept the prize. The government arrested Liu in December 2008, hours before he released a document named Charter 08 that called for greater freedoms and for the Communist Party to give way to gradual, democratic change. In announcing the peace prize Friday, the Nobel committee issued a challenge to China to live up to its responsibilities as the world's second-largest economy and a burgeoning diplomatic and military power. Liu had been virtually unknown among ordinary Chinese. University students in Beijing were wrestling Friday night with a mix of pride and suspicion over the award. Students on the online bulletin board of China's top university were asking angrily how someone in prison could win the peace prize, said Peking University student Yang Yuan. "But then I thought about it — wasn't Mandela in prison?" Yang said. "So I just don't know about this." South Africa's Nelson Mandela was actually awarded the Nobel Peace Prize three years after his release from prison. He shared the prize with then-South African leader F.W. de Klerk for their efforts to bring racial reconciliation.
I know quite a bit about the Opium War(s) having read about them before and also having just visited Shanghai a few weeks ago and seeing the exhibits about how Shanghai became a foreign concession. And it still is a ridiculous comparison. You are comparing the handing of an award to a jailed dissident to a geopolitical move backed up by military action. The Nobel committee has no real political power and certainly no military power to call upon. It is at most symbolic. To compare it to the Opium War(s) is a disservice to history that comes off as extreme. Except that the Nobel committee is not the US government or people and in recent years the Nobel Committee has awarded prizes that sent an overt message against US governments, such as Al Gore winning the prize during the Bush Admin.. I can understand the argument that the Chinese feel this is Western meddling in internal affairs but you have to consider really what is the implication of winning the Nobel Prize. While I don't think it is a joke there is no practical implication where as the Treaty of Tientsin did and was backed by guns to enforce it. If you guys can't see the difference between those there isn't much of a basis to have a rational discussion. The US and Europe clearly see the PRC as a rival that is no secret. To the extent that they are seeking to subvert the PRC I think it depends on what you mean by subvert. The global economy means that the US and Europe are dependent on the PRC and vice versa any attempts by either side to destroy the other physically or economically would likely end up doing serious harm to all. I have no doubt that US and European governments would like to see political change but by their own words and actions that doesn't mean they would support the dismantling of the PRC. I didn't compare the Tea Party to Communism. You must be mistaking my comments with someone else. My comment was saying that a comparing the awarding the Nobel Prize to the Opium War was as ridiculous as the Tea Partiers comparing the HCR Bill to the Final Solution. In both cases a disservice to history. I am glad you see that there is some value to Liu winning the award.
I've heard a lot about fear of former colonial states opening up their economies to foreign powers and that it's just modern day imperialism. India was like this as well, with many feeling that the U.S. would turn India into a consumer society dependent on big macs and just stripping all it's resources from it to resell it to them at a higher price. Of course, the reality has turned out to be sharply different as what's actually happened is the move of global manufacturing to China, India, and Mexico and Americans buying finished products often under American brand names but imported from abroad. Considering how much China has "opened" us up, I think the counter feeling is that China should create a level playing field. It's amusing to see people claim that we don't treat China as "equals" when in reality I think the U.S. just wants them to abide by the rules and not do things like fix their currency to make their goods artificially cheaper. The two economies are highly interdependent. But I think once the U.S. recovery is strong, we should take a harsh stance against China and impose sanctions for both illegal trade practices and civil rights violations. But let's be real here - China is a rival to the U.S. China seeks to become the most powerful nation and control all resources in Asia. It already bully's its neighbors regularly. We've seen how easily it made Japan back down like a scaredy cat, and it's bullied India over the border issue, it's bullied the Phillapines and Indonesia (Spratleys Islands) and it continues to bully Taiwan. Naturally the worlds reaction will be to try to contain this China or hope it becomes a nation that seeks to be more harmonious with it's neighbors. In that regard, the U.S. policy of pushing civil rights is right because a China that is more open internally will like be more open externally.
Of course freedom of speech is not really free, there is a limit balanced by higher interests. Anybody knows that. I just want you to take look at what Liu did in China and tell me what he did was to subvert China, committed a treason, or gave out a hate speech. Why do you bring up Nazi speech? Plain and simple, Liu did nothing even close to that. What he did was noble and peaceful. Yeah, under your logic Nazi's euthanasia would have been OK, b/c we are not supposed to passing on our values to legal conducts under other countr's law. Iran's stone head law is ok b/c we are not supposed to second guess other country's laws. Load of bull craps. There is a difference between international principle of comity/respect of sovereign and this shiat going on in China. Don't conflate recognition of efforts in upholding universal human rights with disrespect of other country's law in general. It's not about that all, and I don't why you see it that way w/ a load of intelligently guised crap. Lastly, Chinese are not as happy as you though they were.
What did Liu actually say that was subversive? Calling for reform is...well, reformist. But it's not like he was trying to overthrow the gov't. Criticizing gov't isn't subversive, heck in the U.S., it's considered patriotic!
The guy from Berkeley Asian society said it best on PBS last night, China needs to get out its victim culture. Or more precisely, Beijing needs to stop manipulate the victim culture. China may be on its schedule to reform the political system and free from outside influence. But it is freaking outrageous to jail Liu for what he did. The Norwegian prize committee didn't give it out this award out of purpose to trade or colonize like what the opium war was. As a matter of fact, it was the opposite, it is China this time around using trade as a threat. Aside from outside influences, and this time it is a positive influence, there is no parallel between the two.
This paragraph shows you know **** about international politics, except the paranoid, apocalyptic and lazy point of view from your crashed tiny brain. Sorry, don't feel insulted because I called it out when I saw it. Please know the facts before pontificating and you'll look much better next time.
This is depressing. First of all, I want to preface what I want to say by saying that Chinese government deserves congratulation on their handling of their economic affair. Similar to the miracles of Japanese econonmy in the 60 and the Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong economies of the 80s, what China did in the last 30 years is nothing but amazing. But as competent as they are in the area of economy, Chinese government is completely incompetent in the areas of political reform and granting political freedom to its subjects. My aunt and my uncle are in their 90's. They were universities' principles. They went through WW2, civil war, etc. Some 50 and 60 years old mandarins in Beijing are still going to treat them like 10 years old and control what they need to know! It is 2010, what countries still control how their citizens shall think? North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, and Burma are the only one I can think of that still do that. Countries in central asia, eastern europe, se asia, africa, and south america had changed. Only a few countries are still treating their subjects like 10 years old. Even though it accomplished greatly in economy, but due to its government, China is just a banana republic as far as political right is concerned.
This is what he was imprisoned for? Crazy. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/10/08/charter_08?page=0,0
