Chen Guangcheng arrives in U.S.

55 posts / 0 new
Last post
Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture
Chen Guangcheng arrives in U.S.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/19/world/asia/china-us-chen/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Yes, I know that the West treats a lot of people like this, and the West needs to stop that shit too, but that's no excuse. 

I really hope that China will finally stop this heavy-handed treatment they impose on dissidents.  I'm really not sure what this guy could have been calling for that was THAT threatening.  Could somebody offer some sort of hint on why Beijing would hassle somebody like him?

Fidel

First off, I would want to know why Chen thinks visiting the U.S. would further the cause of human rights in China. Why not visit Sweden, Norway or Denmark instead? Why not show some solidarity with Greeks? Why snub Sainte Kitts and Nevis like this? Who, exactly, are his new friends state side? Does he not realize which country is the biggest jailer of its own citizens? Oops? 

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Well, those are good questions, to which I don't have the answer.

I suppose that, in the short term, he had to go to the U.S., because his departure from China was negotiated by the States.  Not sure you can draw any conclusions about his feelings on issues not involving China, though.

 

Fidel

Sorry, Ken. I don't think China is a champion of human rights, either. Certainly not. I suppose the most effective way of getting their attention in Beijing is to make friendly with the U.S. for sure.

voice of the damned

I suppose that, in the short term, he had to go to the U.S., because his departure from China was negotiated by the States.  Not sure you can draw any conclusions about his feelings on issues not involving China, though.

Lots of people bearing respectably progressive credentials have gone to live in the US. David Miller studied at Harvard, for example, and Dave Barrett taught at the same univeristy after quitting provincial politics. I've heard of people even further left on the spectrum going to the US as well, usually with some academic tie-in, but can't think of the names off the top of my head 

I don't know anything about this Chen, he may very well be a bad guy. But I don't think the mere fact of his going to live in the US demonstrates that point.

Ghislaine

Here is some info on what Chen was doing in China that was bugging the authorities so much: [url=http://feministing.com/2012/05/03/chen-guangcheng-reproductive-rights-ac... Chen Guangcheng Reproductive Rights Activist [/url]

 

Quote:
He's a blind Chinese human rights lawyer and activist who has been occupying the news recently after making a dramatic late-night escape from his home, where he was being kept under house arrest against his will by the Chinese government.

The reason for his years-long imprisonment (made famous by Christian Bale's attempted visit just last year )? His activism against forced sterilizations, forced abortion, and China's "one child" policy.

 

...

That's why I'm disappointed that Guangcheng is not being hailed more widely as a feminist hero and champion of reproductive rights. While it's not clear what his position would be on a wide range of reproductive freedoms, it is certain that his crusade against forced abortion is a feminist cause. More apt than the whitewashed "human rights activist" label he's been given in the news is "reproductive rights activist" and perhaps even "feminist."

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

By getting involved with the American government he is merely showing his naivety.  If you get sentenced to house arrest in Canada for protesting against government policy and then you escape I am sure there would be repercussions.  He does not like a government policy that is as bad as the eugenics movement was on this continent.  We had forced sterilizations in Canada that only ended in 1972.  Like China's one child policy it was was broadly supported by our political elite.  Some of the most progressive figures in Canadian history fell into the eugenics cesspool.

He is a brave man but no good can come to the Chinese people by way of the imperialist USA.  The US reeks from the gulags and prisons they operate around the world full of dissidents that they call terrorists.  But despite that they know no shame.  For a nation the wears its Xian religion on its sleeves it certainly has not learned the lesson from the bible.  I am still waiting for them to take up the cause of the innocent Palestinians held for years without even a Chinese "show" trial.

Quote:


Matthew 7:3-5

New International Version (NIV)

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

6079_Smith_W

From the intervews I have heard and read, the one-child policy, particularly as it is applied to girls goes a bit beyond what the situation was in Canada. Even so, it's not a question of who is worse. The point is, that is what he was trying to fight.

As for how he got himself out of there, I can't speak from experience, but I think if I had one shot at it, I would bank on the country that is likely to have the best chance of offering asylum, and be the most visible internationally. And in that, he chose correctly.

In short, I think his goal was to get the hell out, not look for political allies.

(edit)

After all, what kind of response has Canada had regarding Huseyincan Celil? And we have even sent accused people back to China.

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

After all, what kind of response has Canada had regarding Huseyincan Celil? And we have even sent accused people back to China.

Imagine having normal diplomatic relations with China.  God or America should forbid it.

You jumped the shark on that one 6079.  China is not a rogue nation nor does it have an evil government.  I guess you have been listening to the CBC so much you have internalized their analysis.  They bash China almost everyday in subtle and not so subtle ways.

6079_Smith_W

Did I say that? Any of it?

My point was that Canada has enough respect for China's judicial system that it sent someone back trusting that he would not be executed. That is an argument in favour of normalcy and mutual respect. Even so, our government had no luck raising the case of a Canadian citizen arrested elsewhere and extradited to China. 

My point was regarding what the best choice might be for someone gambling with his life, and so concerned for the safety of his family that he was willing to leave the safety of an embassy.

You can put your ad hominem judgments back where you pulled the rest of your assumptions from.

 

Ghislaine

kropotkin1951 wrote:

 

 China is not a rogue nation nor does it have an evil government.  I guess you have been listening to the CBC so much you have internalized their analysis.  They bash China almost everyday in subtle and not so subtle ways.

I don't use terms like evil, but the one-child policy is an abhorrent violation of human rights, most particularly the rights of women. 

Women's rights always seem to take a back seat to every other concern anyways. The country's population keeps getting a larger and larger majority of its citizens being male. How does this happen? One-child policy, sexism, female infanticide, etc. If he had arrived at the  Canadian embassy, we should've granted him asylum. 

Your argument sounds like Jason Kenney, in his quest to call some countries "safe" and no longer accept refugees from there. 

And I think you need to make a dinstinction, the CBC (in my experience) bashes the Chinese government..not Chinese citizens. 

Fidel

Ghislaine wrote:

I don't use terms like evil, but the one-child policy is an abhorrent violation of human rights, most particularly the rights of women.

Keep in mind that China's one child policy was hatched in the west by a global "think" tank. Computer scientists have a saying: Garbage in, garbage out.  Malthusians are still at it today with spreading their genocidal propaganda based on junk science.

Ghislaine wrote:
Women's rights always seem to take a back seat to every other concern anyways. The country's population keeps getting a larger and larger majority of its citizens being male. How does this happen?

Compare China's fertility rate with that of democratic capitalist India's. If ever there was a country where women have zero basic rights, democratic capitalist India is it. Hundreds of millions of ordinary Indians seek justice in general their entire lives and never find it.

Neoliberalized India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and a number of desperately poor neoliberalizing African countries etcetera have many dissidents who are ignored and shunned by our governments and lapdog newz media. All the time.

What the west actually demands of Beijing has absolutely nothing to do with human rights. Not at all. Beijing could transform China into a neoliberal hellhole where life is cheap and basic human rights trampled daily, and there are real examples, and the west nor our lapdog newz media lackies nor our so-called governments would bat an eyelash of concern. 

And Speaking of blindness: Democratic and fully neoliberalized India has more blind people than any other country What about their basic rights to food and to see a doctor if necessary? Why is neoliberalized India such a conveyer belt of death and human misery unparalleled in the world? That CBC and western newz media propaganda will rot our minds if we aren't careful.

6079_Smith_W

I specifically didn't bring up some of the more shocking things I have heard and read about this policy, and also did not say anything against China because, frankly, I know it would just turn into a game of "Who's Worst". And I say that especially because we are talking about China; I doubt we'd be going here if we were talking about the United States.

Fact is, all countries have bad policies; I presume all have some human rights abuses and certainly some inequality. And I expect most of them have dissidents who are unfairly persecuted. 

As far as I can see Ken Burch brought up all these caveats (and foresaw the sidetrack) in his opening post.

No, I guess we can't just talk about pointless it is to persecute dissidents.

Fidel

6079_Smith_W wrote:
..., I know it would just turn into a game of "Who's Worst". And I say that especially because we are talking about China; I doubt we'd be going here if we were talking about the United States.

China was a fourth world hellhole in 1949. Our boy Chiang Kai-shek had just been routed by Maoists, and Stalin was busy raising an iron curtain against further western aggression against a Russian revolution which finally succeeed by 1917 after deaf ears fell on several unsuccessful demands for basic rights by Russian peasants. By the latter half of the 1970s, Maoists had achieved an infant mortality rate better than all of the capitalist thirdworld average. Enter the western world friendly Deng regime, and they were reacting to western think tankery a la Malthus combined with some shitty computer scientology.

 I would tend to expect more of the technologically developed western world and its affiliated "think" tanks. We have had many advantages here in the west since 1900 or so which Asian countries have not. The west is also renowned for producing prolific fuckups and bad political advice ourselves. We have to start thinking as a team, as in team blue planet or some such. Political as well as technological imperialism should be scrapped for all time. It should be a team effort now. The future of humanity as a viable species depends on it. We actually have no more time for the bullshit.

6079_Smith_W

I don't think I'm denying that, Fidel. Nor am I denying that other countries have a horrible record.

But I don't think it cancels out the coerced and forced abortions, the murders, and the suicides, and the societal effects that have been the result of this policy. I also don't think it has any relevance to the good question Ken Burch asked at the top of the thread about the treatment of someone who questions the government.

And indeed, I am pleased to see that they let him and his family leave. I did not expect this outcome.

 

Fidel

We are talking about China because China bashing is popular in the U.S. right now. If we want to know why our newz rags are talking about China, this is why. Our opinions are highly encouraged to resemble and fall in line with those popular ones promoted in the imperial master nation. Kind of takes the mystery out of things, doesn't it. Yes it's like a cheaply bad sci-fi: I have looked into the face of the force which put the idea in our heads. We are bred, and led, ourselves. - Fidel Connery

Meanwhile there are political dissidents, socialists, social activists, teachers, students, doctors, peasants and union leaders who are imprisoned, tortured, murdered and new names added to government lists to be hunted by right wing death squads in the name of freedom and democracy right here in our very own hemisphere. These basic human rights violations, as in here in this part of the world as opposed to that country way over there on the other side of the planet, continue to be sanctioned and condoned by leading nations of the OAS year after year, decade after decade.

And yet I have this compelling urge to talk about China, a country on the other side of the world. So let's discuss China the new evol empire since approximately "Chimerica's" economic divorce in the 2000's. And the divorce proceedings have been bitter, no question about it.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

 

So Fidel are you saying what got posted about China here is not true or just should not be talked about because you don't like seeing people talk about it because it doesn't bash the countries or systems you want to bash?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Ghislaine wrote:

Your argument sounds like Jason Kenney, in his quest to call some countries "safe" and no longer accept refugees from there. 

Actually my point was that China when it comes to human rights is no worse than we are or most countries are for that matter. I don't know how you got the above from what I wrote but whatever. 

This man has every right to run from his government but running into the arms of the imperial propaganda machine does nothing to help his righteous cause IMO.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Ghislaine wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

 

 China is not a rogue nation nor does it have an evil government.  I guess you have been listening to the CBC so much you have internalized their analysis.  They bash China almost everyday in subtle and not so subtle ways.

And I think you need to make a dinstinction, the CBC (in my experience) bashes the Chinese government..not Chinese citizens. 

I meant the nation and I stated China. Why should I make a distinction. Our state media regularly trash talks the Chinese government and fawns over Hillary Clinton.

6079_Smith_W

@ kropotkin 1951 #18

I don't know about that.

Why should one assume that an immigrant or political refugee must support the politics of his or her host country, or refrain from criticism or political action? Or that an immigrant's credibility is necessarily undermined based on which country s/he decides to go to.

You might want to read what Einstein had to say about McCarthyism, the arms race, and racism in the U.S. Just one example; there are plenty that disprove that claim. 

Chen picked the country which offered the best chance of getting out. That is all. If there is something requiring him to stop being a critical thinker at the border, I am not aware of it.

 

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

 

6079_Smith_W wrote:

@ kropotkin 1951 #18

I don't know about that.

Kropotkin1951 at post 18 wrote:

Actually my point was that China when it comes to human rights is no worse than we are or most countries are for that matter. I don't know how you got the above from what I wrote but whatever. 

This man has every right to run from his government but running into the arms of the imperial propaganda machine does nothing to help his righteous cause IMO.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Why should one assume that an immigrant or political refugee must support the politics of his or her host country, or refrain from criticism or political action? Or that an immigrant's credibility is necessarily undermined based on which country s/he decides to go to.

I don't think anyone should assume any such thing. Why do you?

6079_Smith_W

I'm responding to this statement:

"This man has every right to run from his government but running into the arms of the imperial propaganda machine does nothing to help his righteous cause IMO."

He didn't run into the arms of any propaganda machine, and he did nothing at all to compromise his work. He got himself and his family out of a bad situation.

(edit)

A number of reports pointed out that his seeking asylum was an embarrassment for the U.S., and that they may have discouraged him and pressured him to leave the embassy. So again, I am not sure how this plays into the imperial propaganda machine. Near as I can tell, the U.S. comes out of this looking weak, and willing to put politics ahead of their stated principles.

Fidel

6079_Smith_W wrote:
 So again, I am not sure how this plays into the imperial propaganda machine. Near as I can tell, the U.S. comes out of this looking weak, and willing to put politics ahead of their stated principles.

Warshington continues to surround China militariliy while, and at the same time, U.S. corporations continue to profit by cheap labour in China's maquiladoras. But it's a tricky situation because while certain U.S. corporations profit in China, overall U.S. trade and accounts deficits continue mounting. And the banking/financial cabal want China to fully float the Yuan and lower restrictions on foreign ownership of China's banking and other key sectors of the economy normally associated with national security in the English speaking countries. And the vicious empire would also dearly love to bomb hell out of Iran and make a grab for the oil in that country and strangling off some large percentage of China's economy in the process. And so they continue aiding and abetting Al-Qa'eda and other mercenaries in and around Syria, Iran's only friendly the the region. It's more great game baloney dialed up.

Fidel

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:
So Fidel are you saying what got posted about China here is not true or just should not be talked about because you don't like seeing people talk about it because it doesn't bash the countries or systems you want to bash?
 

I'm saying what Dave Lindorff says about it; that Chen Guangcheng should have fled to a Norwegian, New Zealand, French or Bolivian embassy. Iow's, Chen should have fled to a country where they actually take seriously their own rhetoric on human rights. 

Chen fled to the wrong political sanctuary if he thinks the USA gives a pinch about basic human rights. They do mention the U.S. in the main article, do they not? Or is it your opinion that we should avoid discussing that particular detail of the story?

Ghislaine

kropotkin1951 wrote:

 

Actually my point was that China when it comes to human rights is no worse than we are or most countries are for that matter. I don't know how you got the above from what I wrote but whatever. 

 

That is simply not true. As a woman I feel we still have a LONG way to go in Canada, but I can at least recognize, celebrate and be thankful for the rights I do have. Rights that Chinese women DO NOT HAVE. How can you claim Canada is no worse than China? 

Especially in the realm of women's rights? 

And Fidel - the subject of the thread is China. If you want to start a thread about India - start one? Ditto for all the other countries you listed off. 

Fidel

Ghislaine wrote:
And Fidel - the subject of the thread is China. If you want to start a thread about India - start one? Ditto for all the other countries you listed off. 

Agreed. Apparently Chen has more value to the U.S. rhetoric on human rights if Chen actually returns to China to resume being a thorn in their side. It's possible that neither country actually wants him at this point. This is a minor incovenience for Hillary and the warmongers busy lobbying Beijing to approve vicious sanctions waged against China's allies North Korea and Iran. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Ghislaine wrote:

How can you claim Canada is no worse than China?

Sven Sven's picture

Ghislaine wrote:

That is simply not true. As a woman I feel we still have a LONG way to go in Canada, but I can at least recognize, celebrate and be thankful for the rights I do have. Rights that Chinese women DO NOT HAVE. How can you claim Canada is no worse than China? 

Especially in the realm of women's rights? 

Thank you for pointing that out, Ghislaine.

Fidel

The UN says Canada violates women's and children's rights all of the time. 

I think there are enough violations of rights and gross violations of basic human rights right here in this hemisphere that we have no need to look down our noses at China or any other country on the other side of the world.

We have nothing to teach or offer China with respect to human rights or democracy. The people still have a job to do right here at home as well as "the backyard" in Latin America. 

That Chen Guangcheng chose to flee to a country that it is the largest jailer nation in the world and most prolific torturer and most militarily aggressive nation is a terrible irony. His blindness is exceeded only by his political naivety.

Ghislaine

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Ghislaine wrote:

How can you claim Canada is no worse than China?

The new law (which I believe will be struck down by the courts), tear gas, arrests, mask law, etc. is all unacceptable. 

But, it does not compare to Tianammen Square and having no legal system/Charter for recourse. 

Ghislaine

...plus I cannot imagine Charest's Liberals getting re-elected. Good lucking waiting for the next election date in China. 

Fidel

Elections for the amusement of rich people, yes-yes. Perhaps his hosts will show Chen how election rigging"colour revolutions" , and Arab Springs are managed, too. Good one. And let's not forget the futility of protesting U.S. Military occupations in South Korea when more than 2000 were massacred in 1980. Yes, it's highly possible that Chen was given some bad advice somewhere along the line. 

6079_Smith_W

Fidel wrote:

That Chen Guangcheng chose to flee to a country that it is the largest jailer nation in the world and most prolific torturer and most militarily aggressive nation is a terrible irony. His blindness is exceeded only by his political naivety.

I can appreciate that you don't like what he did, nor that we are talking about it.

But frankly, I think the things you see as most important aren't relevant at all.

Think for a minute of how desparate he and those who helped him must have been to attempt his escape - especially considering his very real physical disability which you are using as a convenient metaphor.

Think of  how much more desparate he must have been to leave the safety of the embassy because of threats to his family. Personally, I think seeing anything in this other than his need to escape is missing the point.

Bottom line - He achieved his goal, and China let him go. I fail to see what is naive about that.

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Do you think the next government of Quebec is going to disband the riot police? I don't live in China but I know many people who go back and forth to China regularly.  Repression there is like in most totalitarian states. It is subtle. If you ignore politics you have nothing to fear from their state. That is the very same as in Canada. 

If you are an anarchist wanting to protest in Canada you will be treated every bit as bad as a Chinese dissident wanting to protest the very foundations of their government. We have just as draconian laws in Canada that allow for incarceration without due process or the right to confront the accusations made against you. We have people in our jails under those anti-terrorist laws and they have started arresting some of the Montreal protestors under that legislation.

The difference I see between Canada and China is that China is progressing towards greater rights and freedoms and Canada is sinking into a being a totalitarian state.  Whether we have intersected yet and are worse than they are is not clear.

 

Fidel

6079_Smith_W wrote:
Bottom line - He achieved his goal, and China let him go. I fail to see what is naive about that.
 

So why would he and his wife want to go back to China? What exactly is Chen's goal in your opinion?

Why would Chen flee one hard line dictatorship for a military one in the U.S.? is Chen aware that the USA is home to the largest gulag population in the world? Why did Chen snub a list of countries where their militaries don't command more than half of federal expenditures, or any other country in the world where black people are not over-represented in prison populations at six times the rate in apartheid South Africa? Does Chen have any idea how Uncle Sam pays lip service to human rights while in gross violation of basic rights on a daily basis both at home and abroad?

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

 

Maybe he doesn't see the US as you do Fidel... Maybe the things you think are important in your dislike of the USA aren't as important to him. Maybe the guy has distant family here in the USA,  who knows.

Fidel

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:
Maybe he doesn't see the US as you do Fidel...

Agreed. He most probably does not see what I have seen while living and working in the U.S.A. and observing for extended periods here in the northern colony.

Bec.de.Corbin wrote:
Maybe the guy has distant family here in the USA,  who knows.

I have family living in the USA. Some are buried there. I am related to people who fought in the civil war. I have rather close relatives who ran a school in Los Angeles last century. Does that mean I should shut up and protest not? Love it or leave it, Bec?

I thought this was a thread for protesters and comments supportive of human rights. Babble is usually alive with human rights. Why am I being discouraged from discussing basic human rights? I don't understand.

6079_Smith_W

Fidel wrote:

So why would he and his wife want to go back to China? What exactly is Chen's goal in your opinion?

You can read that interesting article as well as I can. I'm not that surprised.

It doesn't change the fact that he just recently escaped custody, and created an international incident in order to seek asylum and get himself out of China.

 

Sven Sven's picture

I have to hand it to you, Fidel...you're nothing if not tenacious.

Fidel

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Fidel wrote:

So why would he and his wife want to go back to China? What exactly is Chen's goal in your opinion?

You can read that interesting article as well as I can. I'm not that surprised.

It doesn't change the fact that he just recently escaped custody, and created an international incident in order to seek asylum and get himself out of China.

Well at least he has a U.S. travel visa now and similar to the ones they issue to "Al-Qa'eda" terrorists fliping in and out of the U.S. since the start of the CIA's proxy war in Afghanistan over 30 years ago and ongoing today.

What if they don't welcome him and his wife back into China as Chen apparently believes they will? What then? Will he die of poverty and neglect in the U.S. like so many other not-so famous Americans and emigres to America? Perhaps they can slide him into China in the back of a Toyota carrying U.S.-Qa'eda trained Uighur mercenaries. (Canadian Eric Margolis @ 7:40 into the podcast)

Fidel

Just remember we're not supposed to mention human rights issues in Chen's sponsor country, Sven. This is where Chen and his wife live happily ever after in the land of freedom and democracy, and the land of liberty where habeas corpus rights have been removed to prevent those from challenging their government accusers and one of the same reasons you guys fought a revolution against crazy George's oppressive rule from the throne in England. Shh!

6079_Smith_W

I'm not sure what you are implying, Fidel. 

That we should blame refugees who come here instead of some better country? 

That coming here means they support our government policy, and the understanding is that they will shut up and not criticize things? 

As for the first question, I expect some people who are in that position don't have the luxury of being picky if they want to live.

And as for the second, do you really think there aren't any immigrants to this country who speak out against injustice here? 

 

Fidel

6079_Smith_W wrote:

I'm not sure what you are implying, Fidel. 

That we should blame refugees who come here instead of some better country?

No I'm not a bigoted xenophobe as you've so carelessly implied for lack of anything intelligent to say. Go fuck yerself.

I'm saying that the country offering sanctuary to Chen is a full partner with Beijing in oppressing Chinese workers and citizens. 

No other rich country in the world has a record for basic human rights abuses that comes close to that of Chen's host country, the USA.

They've broken into the homes of known Occupy Wall St protesters to question them.

Chen's human rights champion nation has just thrown out a court case brought by Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen who was tortured by the American inquisition, and the explanation is that his torturers enjoy complete immunity from prosecution.  

23 year-old David Chong was arrested and incarcerated without charges and nearly died of thirst and almost attempted suicide as a result.

The U.S. military dictatorship and host nation has just declared global assassinations by aerial drones both "legal" and "ethical."

The human rights defender nation is second to none when it comes to rates of incarceration of its own citizens. We could go on and onlisting the appalling gross human rights violations in Chen's host country.

---

The real question is not whether Cheng's rights were violated in China so much as what is the real motive of the USA's cosmetic government in politicizing Chen Guangcheng's case and making it an international issue? Are you not smelling a faint odour of hypocrisy, Smith? 

If Chen had fled to any other country, we would most definitely want to review that country's record on human rights the same. It is you who are avoiding and deflecting the issue of human rights abuses not me nor anyone else in this thread.

The second question is: Why are you trying to change the subject from that of Chen and human rights to focusing on personal comments directed at me? The subject is human rights and all that is mentioned in the news article of interest and, coincidentally, the topic of discussion. That includes America in case you were completely oblivious of the fact. It was the 67th Secretary of State wife of a war criminal and "I'll sell my vote on national medicare to the health insurance lobby for a few hundred thousand and screw Americans bc I'm a Liberal Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton corrupt as they come" who offered sanctuary to Chen not me nor I nor even moi. It was actually I, "Fidel" the babbler from Puerto Ontario, who had absolutely nothing to do with this human rights charade and inspiration for a babble thread topic of discussion.

Pay attention.

And I will just ignore any further attempts by you to smear me and put words in my mouth like you tried to unsuccessfully in the other thread on Cromwell as moderators deliberately looked the other way while telling me what I could do with my flagged complaint. And what's this in the mail addressed to me from Rabble? Ah yes...

MegB

Okay Fidel. This is me "doing my job fer fuxakes".  Don't tell another babbler to go fuck themselves.  And for the record, being rude and belligerent to the mods ain't earning you any points either.

Unionist

I agree with Fidel. Entirely.

Over 2,000 students and allies have been arrested and most charged with purely political offences in the past three months. Hundreds are rounded up daily (like Sunday), with little or no outcry from any political opposition parties in this "democracy".

Let's say, oh, the 150,000 students still on strike appeared at the U.S. border looking for "asylum".

Would I sympathize with their quest? Um, no.

Would the U.S. grant them asylum? Um, no.

Is China a nice social democratic humanitarian type of country? Um, no.

Is Chen a poster child for the most aggressive and dangerous imperialism in the world today? Um, yes.

Do I sympathize with his "escape to freedom"? No, his brand of "human rights" was invented in recent decades to give imperialism a talking point against nations seeking to escape their grasp.

Fidel, I'm with you on this one 100%.

Ghislaine

Unionist wrote:

Do I sympathize with his "escape to freedom"? No, his brand of "human rights" was invented in recent decades to give imperialism a talking point against nations seeking to escape their grasp.

What are you talking about here? What do you mean by "his brand of human rights" being invented. The violations of women's rights in China are well-documented by various organizations. His efforts in this regard are well-known.

Let's all lecture an oppressed person and call him a poster-child for imperialism! That is progressive! I bet he is not really trying to highlight abuses against women and girls or escape oppression with his family...he is really trying to promote American Imperialism. You should tell Hilary Clinton's State Dept. about your theory, as they seemed extremely annoyed by the timing of his antics and the uncomfortable truths he tries to highlight. They tried to "throw him under the bus", so to speak.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Ghislaine you are talking past everyone in this thread.  No one denies that China fails to live up to the ideals expressed in its constitution.  The point I have been trying to make has nothing to do with whether or not he has valid issues because clearly he does.  The point is his treatment as a dissident in China is not much different than he would get in Canada or the US as a person seeking to go outside legal and constitutional channels to effect change.  Their government is totalitarian but not remarkably so in this new millennium.  To me the sad part is that while places like China are actually improving their human rights records places like Canada are marching backwards to tyranny.

MegB

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Ghislaine you are talking past everyone in this thread.  No one denies that China fails to live up to the ideals expressed in its constitution.  The point I have been trying to make has nothing to do with whether or not he has valid issues because clearly he does.  The point is his treatment as a dissident in China is not much different than he would get in Canada or the US as a person seeking to go outside legal and constitutional channels to effect change.  Their government is totalitarian but not remarkably so in this new millennium.  To me the sad part is that while places like China are actually improving their human rights records places like Canada are marching backwards to tyranny.

You are totally missing the point Ghislane is making.  I'll leave it up to her to explain, as I don't want to appropriate her voice.  

6079_Smith_W

Well what are you saying then, Fidel? 

In the first place, I don't see how Chen is compelled in any way to stop doing political work, and secondly I don't see how this situation has made the U.S. look good in any way.

Pretty much every report I read suggested that they were embarrassed by him, and some suggested that they all but forced him out of their embassy. Ultimately they looked weak because this situation shows clearly they aren't in a position to dictate terms to China any more.

As for China, they let him go, which was a pleasant surprise. 

So I see that you, and Unionist, and others, are making some arguments. But how does it relate to Chen's persecution and escape? No way that I can see, unless there is some sort of secret contract he signed with the U.S. government to go on a goodwill tour for them that I am not aware of... or maybe the evil Americans hatched this plot and recruited him 10 years ago, then let him sit in jail for years waiting for the perfect time to launch this PR stunt and embarrass the Chinese. 

(edit)

And yes, I'll ask the more general question again. Why the assumption that refugees and immigrants must bear the political legacy of the countries they come to and not be politically active,  and what is it based on? 

As well, how is it that we know better than they do, and can criticize them for not acting the way we think they should? I don't know about you, but I have never spent any real time behind bars because of my principles, so I don't think I have much call to tell him he didn't do it right.

 

Ghislaine

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Ghislaine you are talking past everyone in this thread.  No one denies that China fails to live up to the ideals expressed in its constitution.  The point I have been trying to make has nothing to do with whether or not he has valid issues because clearly he does.  The point is his treatment as a dissident in China is not much different than he would get in Canada or the US as a person seeking to go outside legal and constitutional channels to effect change.  Their government is totalitarian but not remarkably so in this new millennium.  To me the sad part is that while places like China are actually improving their human rights records places like Canada are marching backwards to tyranny.

Who am I talking past? I am quoting from and replying to specific points made by others.

And, yes, you are mistaken if you think his treatment as a dissident in China is not much different than he would get in Canada or the US. Canada and the US have much greater human rights for their citizens than China. This is undeniable. Here is a description of some of what  Chen, his family and those trying to see him under house arreast have [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/13/amnesty-urgent-action-chen-g... endured [/url]:

 

Quote:

 

As a result of his courageous work investigating reports of forced abortions and sterilisations by local authorities in Linyi, China, Chen Guangcheng, a blind, self-taught lawyer and human-rights activist, has endured a relentless campaign of harassment, persecution and physical abuse for the past six years.

Sentenced to four years and three months in prison on spurious charges of "damaging property and disturbing traffic", the 40-year-old served his sentence in full and should have been freed in September 2010. But upon his release he and his family were immediately placed under house arrest.

The authorities have gone to extreme lengths to cut Chen Guangcheng's family off from the world. Their computer has been confiscated and their internet connection and phone line blocked. Security personnel have flooded Dongshigu village, Shandong province, which is where they live, and surveillance cameras are keeping watch on their home. Neither Chen nor his wife Yuan Weijing have been allowed to leave the house in the past 12 months, not even to shop for groceries or visit the doctor. Their six-year-old daughter has only recently been allowed to attend school.

 

(Article written months prior to Chen becoming an Imperialist tool..so I am not sure if these still count as "human rights invented in recent decades to give imperialism a talking point against nations seeking to escape their grasp")

 

[url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1103579-1,00.html] Here [/url] is a 2005 article featuring an interview with Chen and which outlines the violations of women's rights in China. No forced sterilizations have been done in Canada since the early 70s and I don't know of any forced abortions.

So, your claim that Canada is no better is completely false.

 

Quote:

 

The men with the poison-filled syringe arrived two days before Li Juan's due date. They pinned her down on a bed in a local clinic, she says, and drove the needle into her abdomen until it entered the 9-month-old fetus. "At first, I could feel my child kicking a lot," says the 23-year-old. "Then, after a while, I couldn't feel her moving anymore." Ten hours later, Li delivered the girl she had intended to name Shuang (Bright). The baby was dead. To be absolutely sure, says Li, the officials--from the Linyi region, where she lives, in China's eastern Shandong province--dunked the infant's body for several minutes in a bucket of water beside the bed. All she could think about on that day last spring, recalls Li, was how she would hire a gang of thugs to take revenge on the people who killed her baby because the birth, they said, would have violated China's family-planning scheme.

Pages